Saturday, 4 August 2018


Those of us gripped by the intriguing mystery of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance have for 11 years watched in astonishment as the Portuguese police were portrayed as the bad guys and the parents of the missing child became breakfast TV royalty.  For 5 years plus, they had an open mike, and a platform on TV and in the newspapers to tell their side of the story and to blame the former detective who led the search for their daughter.  
Whilst Gerry and Kate had as much media coverage as they wished to spread their propaganda, they ensured their nemesis, Goncalo Amaral did not.  His book 'The Truth of the Lie' is still not available in the UK.  Here there is only one explanation for Madeleine’s disappearance, abduction. With powerful lawyers Carter Ruck and their reputation as vexatious litigants, the MSM dare not publish articles that question the abduction story.  And as someone on the last blog mentioned, they also had power to shut down discussion on the Mirror Forum and others.  Any criticism of them became taboo. Only ‘bad’ people would think something awful of the heroic couple.  Thus the word 'hater' became synonymous with the McCann case. 
Battle lines were drawn, and the internet saw the beginnings of social media warfare and the birth of trolling.  You were 'pro' the parents, or 'anti' the parents.   The 'pros' worked on the premise that non believers hated Gerry and Kate personally - why? because, they were photogenic, erudite, successful professionals.  If we had an English equivalent of the American Dream, it was the perfection of the McCann family.  Oh and not to forget, their large detached house and all embracing circle of family and friends. Much to be jealous of if you are that way inclined, but happily that kind of paranoid envy affects very few.  It is easier I guess, for the mother of Kate to believe people don't like her daughter because she is attractive, slim and a doctor, than it is to believe they see her as a compulsive liar. 
The McCann media monitoring team put the same amount of planning and tactics into their online army as a Roman General preparing for battle.  And in the early days, they were legion, many angered by heartlessness of those who questioned the parents.  There are very few left, a hardcore of half a dozen I would guess.  But I also wonder if that half dozen were especially prolific in the early days, with dozens of different identities and personas.  That would have been a crazy idea years ago, but now it is accepted as a given.  Trolling worked for Team McCann, they became Masters of it. 
They patrolled social media with the sole intention of demolishing all those who refused to believe the abduction story.  It was pure thuggery online.  They silenced non believers with threats to expose them to their neighbours, friends and employers.  They bullied, hunting in packs, descending en masse if anyone put forward  logical ideas and opinions.  Their aim was to create chaos, to prevent any organised resistance, and to demolish the names and reputations of anyone who wrote truthfully about the Madeleine case.  This case did indeed bring out the worst in human behaviour, both in 'pro' and in 'anti' trolls.
However, time has not been kind to their cause, and with no sign of Madeleine, few believe she is alive and few believe the parents are innocent. The abduction story that was impossible to believe over a decade ago, becomes more absurd with each passing year.  Any calls for more donations to their Fund,  would I think, result in open derision.
The Fund, and the Search for Madeleine campaign has by all appearances, been dormant since Operation Grange began. While Gerry and Kate had no scruples in undermining the original Portuguese investigation with their own private detectives, they have not dared do the same to the officers of Scotland Yard.
But, how will Operation Grange end?  I’m tempted to put up a poll. It can’t just be filed away without informing the public of the result.  It is a publically funded investigation.  Most I think would tick a) Madeleine taken by person, or persons unknown with no explanation given. From a British police PR perspective, that result would be humiliating. They, with their greater wisdom, resources, etc, failed to achieve as much as the interim report submitted by the original investigation.  
Will it just fizzle out?  Buried in the inner pages on a bad news day? That, I wouldn’t rule out. The public’s interest in this case has all but died out, there are much bigger stories dominating the headlines. Do enough people care about how this case ends?  I suspect not.   
An actual result, ie. Arrests etc.  Logically, this is the most likely outcome. The PJ of course have the lead, but there must be a British side for OG to exist. The two forces must be working together and they must reach the same result. It could be dragging on, of course, because they haven’t. That option is scary, because it means one or both sides are being stubborn and they don’t want their disagreement to spill out into the public domain.  Regardless, although public interest in this case may have waned, it is still high profile.  Especially as it has the potential to drag in former members of the establishment who promoted the McCanns as victims of a third world justice system. 
Sticking with that option.  There are some who would say OG have been commanded to find the parents and their friends innocent.  Or, told to ‘investigate the abduction as if it occurred in the UK.  Ie. They were only to investigate leads pertaining to an abduction.  To me that idea is absurd, but some people, especially failed lawyers, insist the small print is carved in stone.  I am not a police officer, but I have seen enough crime documentaries to see investigations can and do, veer off into the most unlikely of directions.  Investigating small crimes can lead to much bigger crimes, and often do.  No-one is above the above the Law, no individual or group can be given assurances that they will not be investigated, the idea is ridiculous.
If this case has been investigated thoroughly, and I am sure it has, then the truth will come out.  We have all been struggling with this jigsaw puzzle for 11 years and know that the wrong pieces cannot be rammed into the blank spaces.  Many have tried (Bennett, Hall, Hyatt, Textusa, HideHo etc) and failed miserably.  Their theories came from their own very dark imaginations, and have little to do with reality.  A tad further up the scale, though we are still scraping the barrel, we have Metodo 3 and Mark Williams-Thomas.  And of course Dave Edgar, who introduced a Victoria Beckham lookalike seen on Barcelona quayside waiting for 'her daughter'. Oh, and the idea that the abductor seen by Jane Tanner may have been a woman.
The McCanns and their friends are trapped by the statements they gave on the morning of 4th May 2007.  They cannot and dare not embellish, because their web of lies is so fragile - that, I suspect, is why they would not return to Portugal to do a reconstruction for Operation Grange. 
In the many cases where the witnesses will not co-operate, the police have no option but to shelve or close the file.   And when they do, the suspects can breathe a big sigh of relief, just as Gerry and Kate did in their 'Expresso' interview.  They were off the hook, no longer suspects, and almost playful.  They had outwitted the PJ and were poised to press ahead with new exciting media careers.  Some might say they were gloating, others, that they let their guard down, revealed their true selves.  In any event, their reaction to the Portuguese giving up the search for their daughter was quite bizarre.
The weight that was lifted from them in the summer of 2008, seems to be back with a vengeance and twice as heavy.  They literally cannot relax until the two investigations close.  And it is very unlikely to close with 'there's no  evidence [that Madeleine has come to any harm]'.  Rather than dismiss the alerts of the dogs, OG dug up areas in the vicinity of 5A, and then head of OG said 'there is possibility was not alive when she was taken from the apartment'.  Not alive, means dead, but the deranged pros insisted it didn't.  I think that kept a thread going for several days.
At the end of the day, only the truth will bring the jigsaw puzzle together. There are no other options.  Though the numbers  following this case are dwindling, there will always be enough people out there to point out all and any flaws in a conclusion that doesn't accommodate all the original statements and facts. 


  1. "Rather than dismiss the alerts of the dogs, OG dug up areas in the vicinity of 5A, and then head of OG said 'there is possibility was not alive when she was taken from the apartment'."

    1. did the dogs alert in the areas that OG dug up - no.
    2. did the OG search in the area find a body - no.
    3. It is called doing a thorough investigation - the area that OG searched is now ruled out.

    1. Just because they didn't find what they were looking for at that time doesn't rule out the possibility that Madeleine died and was buried in the vicinity of the apartment. There was a lot of mileage on the hire car.

      It's not just part of the investigation 18:42, it is a significant part of the investigation. They didn't dig up PDL in order to tick a box.

    2. Hello Anon4 August 2018 at 18:42
      Just a few words regarding the SY digging and the Mccanns'reaction.

      May I remind you about what the McCanns did, while the SY were digging for Madeleine remains in a few selected areas in PDL. They stayed at home and as soon as they were told that no remains had been found, they immediately concluded that Madeleine could not be found dead anywhere and they’ve therefore never asked any police authority to dig elsewhere.

      So Madeleine not found dead in any of a few particular spots in PDL, where she was searched for, apparently meant, at least, to the McCanns, that Madeleine then must have been alive.

      What parent could be so disinterested in an ongoing search for their own child, who may have been the victim of a heinous crime and who might also have been abused, murdered and buried not far away from where he/she’d disappeared.

      The reason why they did not care to go to PDL at that time was, according to the Mccanns’ own explanation, that they were too weak and sensitive to face “the truth” in case Madeleine would’ve been found dead.

      One may describe the McCanns’ emotional state of mind in many ways, but hardly in terms of empathetic characteristics, so I don’y buy their excuse.

    3. ros

      ''Just because they didn't find what they were looking for at that time doesn't rule out the possibility that Madeleine died''

      Yes never give up hope of a corpse eh Ros. You give ghouls a bad name.She was a tiny child for Godsake. Seek help.

    4. Scotland Yard were looking for a body, were they being ghoulish? Do you think we should discuss this case only in terms of Madeleine being alive, because it is ghoulish to think otherwise?

      Nobody wants the child to be dead 16:19 that's why the public were so alarmed at the dangerous situation the children were left in. I didn't put the child at risk, nor did Goncalo Amaral.

    5. Anonymous at 16:19
      ("You give ghouls a bad name.")

      Clarence Mitchell: "I believe Kate and Gerry are not responsible for Madeleine's death."

    6. He thinks they didn't kill her.Because it was an abduction.Are you so desperate you have to twist a phrase and try and suggest it's 'evidence' ?Did he scrach his ear as he said it or something ?

    7. 22:49

      Make of that what you will.

      Clarence Mitchell didn’t “scrach” his ear. He is a professional, not a witness.

    8. Anonymous 9 August 2018 at 22:49

      “He thinks they didn't kill her.”

      I’ve no idea what he thinks, but I know what he said.

      I think the most you might be entitled to ask for is to agree to differ. You propose that your interpretation, not the literal meaning of what was said, be accepted as valid. The burden of demonstrating the validity of your interpretation is on you, I am afraid.

      It may help you to remember what Clarence’s trade is.

      “Because it was an abduction.”

      Let’s do the well-known exercise again: ‘Who says? Where is the evidence?’

      “Did he scrach his ear as he said it or something ?

      I shouldn’t think he did. He might’ve scratched his ar..mpit.

      And now, children, it’s THE SING_ALONG TIME! Just listen to the bass and sing harmony with our wonderful sister Aretha.

      All together now:

      My friends keep telling me
      That you ain't no good
      But oh, they don't know
      That I'd leave you if I could

      The way you treat me is a shame
      How could ya hurt me so bad
      Baby, you know that I'm the best thing
      That you ever had

      Well done! We’ll sing a different song next week.


  2. Taken by person, or persons unknown.

  3. You been on the moonshine again Ros?
    No seriously,I spent the last few years sure Grange would end along the lines of abducted by person or persons unknown,yet just recently am not so sure.
    I mentioned in a recent post that I wondered if the 'decks were being cleared' and Grange was indeed genuine with action to follow.
    Would certainly be a bombshell if that was true.
    Here's hoping.

    1. I suspect it is a bombshell sitting on a back burner 22:45. It has the potential to explode at any time. Not just the revelation that the parents may have been involved but the revelation that our police and our government may have perverted the course of justice.

      In the current climate, that news may not be big enough to Trump et all off the front pages, unless OG include those police officers and politicians who continued with the abduction story, while knowing it wasn't the truth.

      The investigation can't just stop in the same place as Goncalo Amaral and the original investigation. How many crimes have been committed since? Incalculable if a large number of people were covering up the facts of the case in order to deceive the public into believing this was a genuine abduction.

      That bombshell is always on the horizon 22:45. The sheer scale of the crime would not have been possible without the assistance of all those who rushed out to PDL. Realistically, they too should face criminal charges. In fact, with an educated, and conservative guess, the list of Defendants could go over 100.

  4. Boring blog without any evidence of wrongdoing.

    1. Wrongdoing? Interesting choice of word given the very nature of this extraordinarily intriguing and complex case. What kind of person would read a boring blog looking for evidence of wrongdoing any way? Given the very nature of this case, when someone chooses to use the word wrongdoing instead of crime(s)it does rather seem that the person is trying to either minimise or mitigate the seriousness of such a crime by what they suppose to be a lack of evidence. Let me put it this way, If your child was missing, supposedly abducted by person or persons unknown, I am sure you would be expecting the police to be doing all that they can to investigate a serious crime against your child not merely looking for evidence of wrongdoing.

    2. I am not Anonymous4 August 2018 at 22:55

      The title of this blog is HOW WILL OPERATION GRANGE END?

      There is no evidence of wrongdoing by Operation Grange.

  5. "A petition calling for the end of crimes against honour has been delivered to parliament signed by 9,000 people.
    The hope is that Portugal’s “obsolete and medieval” legislation that has been known to ruin lives is finally consigned to the wastebin.
    In the words of the petition’s champion Luís Júdice “these rules simply serve to intimidate whomever has an opinion different to that of the system”.
    Portugal’s defamation legislation is “considered obsolete and medieval by the European Commission”, he told Público, adding that sending people to prison for it “simply doesn’t make sense.

    As a subscriber to the European Convention for Human Rights, Portugal should “kill this issue at its source”, he said, but that is not what is happening.

    Only two years ago, “intellectual and artist” Maria de Lurdes Rodrigues was condemned to three years in jail - which she is still serving, purportedly in a cell with two convicted murderers (click here) - for a long-running battle she waged against high-ranking figures in Portugal’s establishment.

    As Júdice said at the time, Rodrigues is “not a criminal”.

    If people - no matter what position they have in life - feel their honour has been offended, they can take the issue to the civil courts and ask for compensation, he stressed.

    This is the second attempt instigated by Júdice to change a law that to a large extent even conditions Portuguese media.

    Newspapers are frequently threatened with ‘an action for defamation’ just for printing the truth. Often the threats are empty, but the mere fact that they are made can lead to editors and/ or publishers to spiking perfectly valid material.

    Thus this bid is being keenly watched.

    Júdice's first attempt, again in the form of a well-signed petition, failed to be admitted for debate due to the fact that it called on parliament to intervene in the specific case of Maria de Lurdes Rodrigues, which was seen as a violation of the principle of separation of powers.

    This new bid is much more generic.

    It calls principally for an end of crimes against honour but it also “requests the revocation of the Civil Procedure Code” which prohibits “the written or oral use of unnecessary or unjustified expressions which are offensive to the honour or the good name of another, or in respect of institutions”.

    The petition further calls for a parliamentary inquiry into the training of judges, and an overview of judicial decisions that have shown themselves to be incompatible with the Convention of Human Rights.

    This last point could well involve the controversial recent judgement that ruled in favour of two men who kidnapped a woman and beat her with a nail-spiked club (click here) on the basis that she was an adulteress who, in other countries in the world, could be executed for her behaviour.

  6. What are these original statements and facts ? Who made the statements and what are the facts that no policeman has spotted ? Are we cherry picking parts of the Gaspar drunken rubbish, Smithman's spottimg a man in a dark street as he came out of a pub ? Or Amarals various rambling snippets before his book signing tour ? Are we ignoring the statements regarding the forensic team ? All this skewd detective work by bored oliners just keeps them amused. It means nothing more.I think if you cant fit the shoe after 11 years you have to accept that it isn't the right size.Accept it.Move on.Or be brave enough to name the names you believe have been a party to proteting guilty parties instead of the safe 'blame the parents, there's loads of us' option.

    1. Kate McCann (madeleine):

      “Despite the fact that almost a year and a half had gone by we were still receiving photographs of blonde toddlers from concerned members of the public asking, ‘Could this be Madeleine?’ We needed to remind everyone that the little girl we were looking for had grown.”


      Eleven years have gone by. Where is the age progression image of the little girl they are looking for?

  7. Great piece Cristobell! And I like the way that the some of the responses demonstrate how the McCann lobby have always operated.


    Are we cherry picking parts of the Gaspar drunken rubbish, Smithman's spotting a man in a dark street as he came out of a pub ? Or Amarals various rambling snippets before his book signing tour ?


    It's always of interest to see which people are often dismissed and the manner in which they are dismissed. 'Gaspar (sic) drunken rubbish' is a bit rich. I think the Gaspers were onto something. Why did David Payne talk about a 'pact' of silence? Why say that?

    Smithman 'spotting a man in the street as he came out of a pub' is another minimization and trivialization of a group of important eye-witnesses. It was not just some bloke coming out of a pub, it was a family group of NINE people walking back from an evening out. They did not just pass a man - they passed a man carrying a child that was the right gender and the right size approximately to Madeleine McCann. However you want to downplay this sighting, it is important.

    I like the bit about Dr Amaral the best - 'Amaral's various rambling snippets before his book signing tour'. Ha! Priceless. I think you must be talking about Kate and Gerry McCann surely? Their rambling snippets about how they believe their daughter was 'abducted' are nothing more than pure conjecture. There is not one shred of evidence for what they claim happened. Jane Tanner's Tannerman was never taken seriously and is about as mythical as the unicorn. The pair's book signing tour was in pretty poor taste, imo, seeing as there was no evidence at all that she was still alive to find.

    Dr Amaral, on the other hand, conducted a serious police investigation which concluded that Madeleine had died and the parents faked an abduction and hid the body. He and his team arrived at this conclusion based on their thorough investigation including forensics and sniffer dogs.

    The police statements of the McCanns and their friends are fascinating exhibits. I've never read such ramblings - full of uncertainty, hesitation, contradictions and memory lapses which make it look as though they all suffered from a collective amnesia.

    I'm surprised that anon@ 5/8/18 22.15 did not also throw into the pot neighbour Mrs Fenn who heard screaming coming from the apartment and social worker Yvonne Martin who had doubts about the McCann story from the start. How about Nigel Foster from Southampton who approached members of the group on Thursday morning with regards to video-recordings of his daughter playing mini-tennis?

    There are several important eye-witnesses who saw blond men acting suspiciously near the apartment on Thursday afternoon but Kate in her book does not include a single efit of a blond man despite three eye-witnesses (that I know of) describing blond men. One was Mrs Fenn's niece who gave an incredibly detailed sighting. Was this man ever identified and ruled out? Strange that Kate in her book morphs this sighting into dark man of North African appearance. Yet Mrs Fenn's niece is quite clear that the man was blond of Scandinavian appearance. How odd!

    Neighbour Mrs Fenn offered to help but Kate and Fiona Payne are rude to her. Dr Amaral always conducted himself with dignity, imo, which is more than can be said of the McCanns and their acolytes.

    And there are some people who have died in circumstances that might be described as mysterious - in particular a young relative of Dr Amaral living in London who was shot in the head at point-blank range on his doorstep in a killing that had weird echoes of the Jill Dando killing. Police described the killing as a case of 'mistaken identity'. To my knowledge the killer's were never found.

    Then of course there is Brenda Leyland. A very strange case indeed.

    1. The haters lobby are roused.How predictable.

      '' I think the Gaspers were onto something. Why did David Payne talk about a 'pact' of silence? Why say that? ''

      Payne was at PDL. The Gaspars weren't.His reference was regarding gutter press ans online nutcases.Gaspar never mentioned anything in terms of Madeleine's name.'They' weren't onto anything.Mr Gaspar is on record disagreeing with his rambling wife.

      ''Smithman 'spotting a man in the street as he came out of a pub' is another minimization and trivialization of a group of important eye-witnesses''

      Minimised because Smith minimised it too.His opinion is more important than yours.

      ''I like the bit about Dr Amaral the best - 'Amaral's various rambling snippets before his book signing tour'. Ha! Priceless. I think you must be talking about Kate and Gerry McCann surely?''

      No.I'm talking about someone who has suggested that the McCanns stored a corpse in a freezer then secreted it in a coffin to be cremated then drove it away to bury.He was carted off as his trial was coming up for falsifying evidence in a similar case and a guilty verdict( which was what happened) would have embarrassed the home team further.So he went on to falsify evidence in a book...

      ''Then of course there is Brenda Leyland. A very strange case indeed. ''

      Sad, not strange.But nice cheap shot.She was targeted by Murdoch's media to make an example of with Twitter on hand with 'evidence'.Brunt suddenly became a follower then she was gone.

    2. Leonor Cipriano was rightly convicted for the murder of her daughter, it is disingenuous to say the police falsified evidence. And I should add, it really doesn't do the McCanns any good whatsoever to compare them to the Ciprianos.

      It is an outright lie to say GA falsified evidence in a book. If that were the case, why, during the multiple trials, didn't the McCanns highlight any of the alleged falsehoods? GA successfully defended his book in the highest Court in Portugal and he won. That is common knowledge and pretending otherwise is pathetic.

      As for Brenda, it is disingenuous to say she was targeted by Sky. She was targeted by McCann family and supporters on social media and her details passed to Sky TV. She was selected as a target by Team McCann.

    3. Meant to say your use of the word 'haters' sounds more and more paranoid as the years go by. Why do you assume people hate Gerry and Kate? Are they hateful people? When you start thinking everybody hates you, there are much deeper issues.

    4. Thank you for your interesting post 20:03, and your kind words, someone further up found it boring! lol. The McCann supporters are of course coming back with the same old arguments that have never worked, plus portraying the McCanns as victims, not only of Goncalo Amaral, but of everyone! The world has watched them receive everything they wished for, millions in donations, a platform on TV channels all over the world, and the granting of a multimillion pound search for their daughter by Scotland Yard. Yet still they would claim to be victims. Gerry and Kate don't blame themselves for the loss of their daughter, they blame everyone else.

    5. Thank you Dr Fraud. I didn't say anyone hated me.They hate the's equally irrational to hate strangers you haven't met but have judged on imaginary facts you have decided upon are real facts. You and them( haters) have rarely discussed Madeleine and what she must have went through whatever happened.99% of the time it's just a 'let's see what else we can pin on our suspects' blog.Keep pinning and keep inventing. Hopefully your 'deeper issues' will be resolved soon.This case certainly won't be.But that's politics and politicians for you..

    6. ''GA successfully defended his book in the highest Court in Portugal and he won. That is common knowledge and pretending otherwise is pathetic.''

      He defended his right to opine. He has yet to defend his various hypotheses by producing a fact.To translate the right to write and publish a book as the author holding all kinds of evidence to a 12 year old missing person case because he thinks the parents did it and you like that idea is beyond pathetic.It's pitiful.

    7. ''As for Brenda, it is disingenuous to say she was targeted by Sky. She was targeted by McCann family and supporters on social media and her details passed to Sky TV. She was selected as a target by Team McCann.''

      We know Sky and Twitter did what they did,We watched.Where is the proof of A- a McCann was behind it or B- it was a murder or a skillful strategy to drive her to suicide ? If you can't answer A or B your allegations amount to slander and defamation.

    8. Whoa slow down there 20:45. I didn't mention murder or a skilful strategy to drive her to suicide, you did. Do you now regret that you have put that into people's minds?

      I stand by what I said. According to Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, Brenda's name was in a dossier given to Scotland Yard by the McCann family. Those of us who have been around a while, are all too familiar with 'Exposing the Myth's', the blacklist arm of Stop the Myths.

      Everything that happened to Brenda had been used as a threat by the 'Myths' websites for years. 'Tigerloaf' often rallied the troops to target individuals on Facebook and other social medial. As a target, I was watched 24/7, anything I posted anywhere on social media was copied on the Myths sites. The dossier had over 100 pages on me.

      Yes, they knew exactly what they were doing. They were attempting to shame non believers, expose them as internet trolls (just as they did with Brenda). They did what they said they were going to do. At the height of their online thuggery, they were threatening to expose every McCann doubter to their employers, neighbours, family, friends etc. Owners of their own companies faced the very real fear that their businesses would be boycotted. They wrote bad reviews on my Amazon book page, and 'reported' me to my publishers.

      Blacklists always end in tragedy, and with this one it was inevitable. Gerry and Kate didn't just want to silence their critics, they wanted them dragged through the mire, an example made.

      Your slander and defamation arguments sound like a desperate litigant grabbing at straws.

    9. Say 'they'/we hate the McCanns is illogical 20:36. Let me explain it to you as if you were 4 years old. Its like if a child did something naughty, you don't hate the child, you hate the naughty thing they did.

      Gerry and Kate chose to put themselves on the public stage, they have probably given more interviews than any victim of a crime. People have therefore, been able to judge the McCanns on their multiple appearances. Some people, the public take straight to their hearts, some get their heckles up. And this happens to everyone in the public eye, there are no exceptions.

      For whatever reason, Gerry and Kate have always come across as automatons. They show none of the emotions, or feelings that we would expect from the parents of a missing child.

      I find it odd that you expect we 'haters' to discuss Madeleine and the graphic details surrounding her suffering and disappearance. We don't, because this is not a hate site. I have no wish to add to the parents' pain. Other sites will probably give you the detail you are seeking, but this one is a little further up the evolutionary scale.

    10. ''Whoa slow down there 20:45. I didn't mention murder or a skilful strategy to drive her to suicide, you did. Do you now regret that you have put that into people's minds? ''

      You're back-tracking I see . Typical when the chips are down.

      Given the context of this discussion thread and the context of your blog, how can you explain :

      '' She was targeted by McCann family and supporters on social media and her details passed to Sky TV. She was selected as a target by Team McCann.''

      That's an accusation . it's not the first time you've tried to insinuate that the lady was the victim of some kind of 'hit'. Admit it.

    11. ''Your slander and defamation arguments sound like a desperate litigant grabbing at straws.''

      They sound like an accurate observation .

    12. Goncalo Amaral had the right to voice his opinion and to present his thesis. That he was the detective in a high profile, controversial case was just icing. He was a central figure in a case that launched a war on social media, and was making headlines on a regular basis. That the large audience was created by the McCanns was their bad luck.

      You have no respect whatever for GA's right to defend himself 20:40. He was being pulverised in the British press, the target of petty racism, even from the establishment. Why shouldn't he defend his honour?

      I'm afraid I am very short on patience with wannabe books burners 20:40. It is in my opinion, the desire to burn books and destroy art is the height of ignorance.

      The McCanns should have demolished GA's book, with a rebuttal of every thesis he put forward. Say, for example, the alerts of the dogs. If they had been able to rebut, even one of the reasons GA put forward to support his thesis, that would have been the end of it. The McCanns have had every opportunity to challenge his arguments, why haven't they?

    13. Hi Rosalinda
      Regarding the text by anon 20:45 and your comment on it

      You should perhaps also have mentioned that the McCanns explicitly said that GA deserved to suffer. Moreover,in trying to destroy his life, both socially and economically, they didn't show any feelings of remorse whatsoever, but kept on talking about their own suffering instead of Madeleine's, all of which is just as bizarre as the whole farce about Madeleine being taken by a stranger to be kept alive for more than 11 years. The McCanns believe that. Who else does?

    14. Yes, that statement, 'I want GA to feel misery and fear' is a chilling insight into Kate's character. By contrast, she forgave the abductor. Bizarre, because I imagine any mother would gouge out the eyes of a monster who harmed their child, with their bare hands. It is not something that is forgivable, by a mother, in any universe. I am sure every mum has experienced 'mummy tiger' moments, Dads too, we are genetically programmed to defend our young ferociously.

      Someone scolded me earlier for not talking enough about Madeleine. Sadly, very little is known, but that is probably a good thing. But it is odd, that her parents, who strongly believe she is alive, never speak of the future she has lost, or indeed the future she is now living. I once saw Sara Payne (an honourable lady) speak about her beloved daughter Sarah, who had been abducted and murdered. Dr. Sara Payne, she has an honoury doctorate, spoke about the future her daughter should have had, the life she should have shared with her siblings. Her face crumpled into tears, there was nothing poker face about it, her feelings were as raw as they ever were. Most notable, she didn't speak about her loss, she spoke about her daughter and her siblings loss. Everyone watching, I am sure, took her to their hearts.

      Gerry and Kate have absolutely no idea what emotions they should be feeling and displaying. There are no text books, as they pointed out. From their bizarre 'praise Allah' performance on the night to their rush to raise money, to their twilight zone TV performances. That none of it rang true isn’t GA’s fault. I suspect they are a very unhappy pair, because they must always find someone else to blame for their faults. They are both spoilt, only child, youngest sibling - their sense of entitlement is far greater than most. Kate’s mum probably told her other girls didn’t like her because she was pretty and intelligent. I’m not knocking her, its a line most mums use. But delusional and inappropriate in this context.

    15. Kate in struggling to describe her feelings, said, first, bizarrely, that she felt lonely. I really don’t know what to make of that. If this were ‘ Jeopardy’, it would be be, words the mother of a missing child would never say. Kate sounded as though she were put on the spot, asked a question she hadn’t prepared for. To me every interview comes across as strained and stressful, the couple always appear to be on edge. From the handholding to the thigh stroking to the visible white knuckles.
      GA by contrast is always relaxed and at ease. Gerry and Kate foolishly believe that the more they appeared on our TV screens, the more likely we were to believe them. Unfortunately for them, the opposite happened, but they were too vain to see it! Almost Trumpish!

      There is no textbook on how to act when you lose a child. Most people however have experienced intense grief, we know how it feels and we know what it looks like. The McCanns failure to convince the public of their innocence and shift the blame onto GA and the PJ, is entirely down to them. But again, they accept responsibility for nothing. It has to be someone else's fault.

      No public figure has backed the McCanns in their campaign against Goncalo Amaral and it has caused a huge decline in the followers they had. Personal vendettas are ugly, vendettas against a detective who was only doing his job, uglier still.

      This must be the McCanns' lowest ebb. Another deadline looms, will OG be filed away or will another lump sum be granted? Will they be given even an inkling of what OG think happened to their daughter?

      Vexing as it may be for we who follow this case, for the McCanns, it must be horrendous. They want answers. They want to be cleared. They want closure. So vocal at past injustices, why are they not demanding answers? It's been 7 years since the investigation began. Even a saint would run out of patience.

      From any perspective the dragging out of these investigations is horribly cruel. Perhaps it is part of some tactic to make the more vulnerable crack, who knows, but it isn't kind. They, I suspect are experiencing all sorts of misery and fear. The truth won't so much set them free as maybe, see them in prison.

    16. Anonymous 6 August 2018 at 20:36

      “They hate the's equally irrational to hate strangers you haven't met but have judged on imaginary facts you have decided upon are real facts.”

      It is a “real” fact that, according to the McCanns, they left their three little ones on their own in an unlocked apartment in unfamiliar circumstances. It is also a “real” fact that they have refused to accept liability for what happened to Madeleine. They have shown no contrition.

      The strong dislike felt by many towards the McCanns is not “irrational”: it is in our culture to look after our little ones. Those who fail to do so, and then refuse to accept liability for the consequences of their failure, just have to stomach what comes.

      Being disliked is an infinitely small price the McCanns have been and will be paying for having failed their three children.

      Leave and learn, dear comrade.



    17. Anonymous 6 August at 20:36
      ("This case certainly won't be [resolved soon].But that's politics and politicians for you..")

      That's politics, politicians and the McCanns for you.

    18. Disliking and hating are further apart than it first appears.Disliking is more often than not, rational.Hating is, more often than not,irrational.I, for one, can never defend, nor want to, the negligence you're discussing.But i won't convert that reasonable reaction into hatred of two people who either ended their child's life or disposed of her. It makes no sense. The absence of proof or arrests doesn't persuade me to either. The erratic guessing games of those trying to build a case for them being involved in paedophilia, money laundering or contract killing does little to rescue any credibility for those perpetuating the nonsense.These are the 'real' facts.

      I've learned much and continue to.That's why i never profess expertise in anything or try to sell shoe shine.I feel no real need to big myself up.I'll leave that to those who do.Leave ? I have had a terrible problem respecting commands as long a i can remember :)

    19. Anonymous 7 August 2018 at 20:41

      “That's politics, politicians and the McCanns for you.”

      Most likely.


    20. Politicians seized control of the investigation and the police have danced to their tune ever since. Why would that happen if no figures of authority or elite were not in jeopardy ? If the McCanns have such power over so many, from the PM to the police to Twitter and Sky- please show me how that came about.They were-and still are- members of the public who were on holiday.Why would so much be done by so many at any financial cost to keep the case apparently alive and no sign of progress beyond fictional news stories nobody believes ?

    21. I don't think you can say politicians seized control of the investigation and the police have danced to their tune ever since. Politicians don't have that kind of power, and there have been several Home Secretaries since the case began. The idea that each Home Secretary will just carry on with a corrupt case is absurd.

      The McCanns, their PR team and their proactive family were promoting the abduction story, the politicians, the police and the charities, simply latched on. As we saw, an abduction suited a number of people.

    22. not really an answer is it..

    23. '' Politicians don't have that kind of power,''

      Really ? Are you serious ?

    24. The UK police do not and have never had the power or authority to investigate Madeleine's case or any other case abroad without the written permission of a politician (Home Secretary).

      Without the politicians authority the police actions would be unlawful and criminal.

      Where was the then HS John Reid, on the night of May 3rd 2007.

      OG obviously know, so another 90k splash out in September to stop the FOI requests and the farce will go in

    25. Hi JJ. Matters not if the case drags on and on, not to you and I anyway. To those responsible for Madeleine's disappearance, it probably matters a lot. The stress they are living under must be excruciating, I know I couldn't handle it. And I don't just mean those directly involved, but all those on the periphery, all those with possible charges of 'perverting the course of justice' hanging over them. The first time Sir Bernard HH spoke out OG, as it opened iirc, he said there was something like 130+ persons of interest.

      I am carefully following the Mueller investigation of Trump at the moment, it's a bit like watching a live hunt, as the FBI move in on their main targets. How many targets do OG have? and who are the main ones?

      I still believe that the truth will win through. They have had 11+ years to try and fit square pegs into round holes and it simply doesn't work. Only the correct pieces will fit.


    26. What baffles me with OG is that, starting out with 130+ persons of interest, they must have had ample opportunity to lean on those persons of interest, offering them deals that would lessen any criminal charges they might face.

      Perhaps I am watching too much US news, but even I am starting to question where OG are going with their investigation. From a practical perspective, there is not much English speaking detectives can do in Portugal, so logically they are investigating Brits.

    27. We have been told OG had 38 crack detectives working on the case. Is there a team photo, or any proof whatsoever of this?

      OG can only pursue suspects who have been approved by interested politicians, they cannot go where the evidence takes them and is why OG is a corrupt farce.

      Who gave Superintendent Hill the authority to be in PDL, certainly not the Portuguese police or government. Only a UK politician could authorise it.

      Keeping OG open prevents FOI requests on the repeated skulduggery of CEOP and many others. Cops investigating cops, no chance.

      Hillsborough required even more dishonest and corrupt coppers, and the cover-up continued, for how long?

  8. ''Thank you for your interesting post 20:03, and your kind words,''

    The post at 20:03 was your own.

    1. Thank you for pointing out that obvious error. I mean't 12:04.

    2. final answer ? :)

    3. Interesting that anon doesn't mention the gangster-style killing of the young relative of Dr Amaral - the man who Kate thought should 'feel pain'. I wonder what kind of pain Madeleine would have felt? Whether you take the parents' version of events - stolen by a paedophile- or whether you take Dr Amaral's opinion that Madeleine died and the parents covered it up - it's not a nice ending for a nearly four year old.

      Can the McCAnn parents never take a shred of responsibility for what happened for their daughter? It appears not.

      There is evidence from the sniffer dogs that Madeleine died in apartment 5A. The McCAnn statements and that of their friends are beyond ridiculous.

      There is no reason whatsoever to believe that the Portuguese police did not do a thorough investigation. The same cannot be said of the UK police, sadly.

      If you read the statements of the McCAnns friends - the Tapas lot - there are many indications that they know Madeleine died that week, imo.

      It's difficult to lie, especially about something like that. Tanner-man was sheer desperation and not believable from the start.

      Inevitably, the McCanns and their supporters wanted to promote the Tannerman theory and discredit Dr Amaral, but, realistically, who would you take more seriously?

      I know who my money is on.

      Also this 'hater' stuff is just absurd. Silly labelling. It's not to do with 'hating' - I can't be bothered with such a negative emotion - it's to do with not believing and also to do with recognizing BS and wanting to see justice done.

    4. Anonymous 6 August 2018 at 21:56

      “final answer ? :)”

      Bootiful! Worthy of brover Ziggmund himself!

      Ah! Jesus is on the line: “Ziggmund, where art though? Me loves you! Me was wrong, for you are the way, the truth, and the life. Peace I left with you. Arise, let us go hence.”

    5. ''Inevitably, the McCanns and their supporters wanted to promote the Tannerman theory and discredit Dr Amaral, but, realistically, who would you take more seriously?''

      Amaral's superiors didn't take him seriously.Only those who hitched a lift on the anti bandwagon did and do.

      ''Also this 'hater' stuff is just absurd. Silly labelling. It's not to do with 'hating' - I can't be bothered with such a negative emotion - it's to do with not believing and also to do with recognizing BS and wanting to see justice done. ''

      'Hater' is labelling, true.So is 'supporter'.They serve a purpose; we know who is being addressed or referred to.It isn't about emotions, negative or otherwise.It's about attitudes adopted by people. Those who deny the conclusions of Amaral's bosses and the forensics team never offer a sensible reason for the rest of us to ignore their conclusions.They daren't suggest how and where they went wrong or why they ignored the 'obvious evidence and truth' . It spoils their party.The anger and bitterness, as well as envy, of two professional people ( and doctors who should have been more careful) is borne of hatred no matter how much you dilute the paint.It's almost all irrational.How many police and politicians have the McCanns got over a barrel ?I'd say none. Why would they have and how long had they had such strong ties to the elite ? Dare i suggest there's no evidence of that nonsense ? You do remember that 'e' word I hope..

    6. @ Anonymous7 August 2018 at 10:00

      Why don't you grow up?

    7. @00:52

      Your efforts deserve a full reply. I sent one. Unfortunately it was a little negative with regard to Amaral. The hostess in her wisdom is exercising her right to censor free speech that disagrees with her.Odd for such a free spirit. Sorry.

    8. Anonymous 7 August 2018 at 22:03

      Thanks for asking. I’ve no idea. Have you? Why don’t you?

      Jesus you have to ask yourself. Or ask God if you are close.



    9. You say Goncalo Amaral's superiors did not take him seriously. You have nothing whatsoever to support that. The McCanns remained arguidos. They remained arguidos until the following July, when the investigation was shelved because they and their friends would not co-operate. GA's theory was very much alive at the time the case was shelved.

      Where did you get the idea that the 'forensics' have cleared Gerry and Kate? Err, it was the forensics that made them arguidos. Someone died in 5A and a child is still missing. This idea that the forensic evidence gathered in 2007 has been discarded is absurd, who knows, 11 years on, it may be all the more valuable.

      As for hating, trust me no-one envies the Drs McCann.

    10. ''You say Goncalo Amaral's superiors did not take him seriously. You have nothing whatsoever to support that''

      They took him off the case soon after the crime and with a potentially damaging trial looming that could have ruined his and their reputation.

      His ( Amaral) theories will always be alive. So will everyone elses .What good are theories ? The public have an excuse, he doesn't. He was at the crime scene as a detective.

      Forensics didn't clear the McCanns.You misquoted or misinterpreted me deliberately. They found no evidence to incriminate them. The forensics have spoken.The idea of progress 12 years on is a wish.Yes, DNA cleared the family of Jonbenet thanks to touch DNA, but how much more progress would be required to get what you want ? Magic ?

      Nobody should envy the McCanns. They made a horrible error and lost a child.Since then they've been targeted by thousands of empty headed bitter vigilantes.

  9. Sounds like ziggy is back!
    T will be pleased.

    1. Anonymous 6 August 2018 at 21:45

      “T will be pleased.”

      Never have I heard a truer word, comrade! Wherein there is no Ziggmund, therein there is no ecstasy.:)


  10. Mr Gaspar is on record disagreeing with his rambling wife.

    Oh, anon...nice try!!

    How many people ramble, apart from you?? LOL!

    1. A capital 'lol' no less. Thank you. It must indicate that my logical conclusion is nonsense. I live and learn. However....

      Perhaps you or one of the mob could point out where Mrs G states that anyone's name was mentioned concerning the infamous lewd gesture made by DP.Or did she merely assume Madeleine was being referred to in her own mind with useless hindsight ? Her suspicion about DP was new .She'd never had trust issues before. This is probably why Mr Gaspar didn't agree with her at the time or when he made a statement. Don't let the actual statements discourage your half -cocked crusade though :)

  11. ''Smithman 'spotting a man in the street as he came out of a pub' is another minimization and trivialization of a group of important eye-witnesses''

    Minimised because Smith minimised it too. His opinion is more important than yours.

    Err - Smithman initally probably didn't realize what he and his family saw was important. We had the mythical Tanner-man floating around at the beginning and we all wanted to believe in the poor, grieving parents - maybe Smithman and Co, after a bit, started not believing the Tanner-man account

    Oh I am very sure Smithman's opionion is MUCH more important that mine's . Double LOL!

    1. Yes, a double lol is an excellent tool to use when trying to defend nonsense and attack logic.Bravo.

      The key words in your desperate guesswork are 'probably' and 'maybe'. I believe these words are commonly associated with guessing.Double bravo.

    2. Sock it to em ziggy.
      Double thumbs up. lol

    3. (Mr Sawdust)

      Hello, hello it's good to be back,it's good to be back,hello,hello.It's good to be back.
      Did you miss me yeah, while I was away and did Ros hang my picture on her wall?
      Did she kiss me yeah, every single day,although she couldn't kiss me at all?And did she love me yeah, like a good litle girl and did she tell that naughty boy not to call and did she love me yeah in her own little world although she couldn't see me at all?
      Hello, hello I'm back,I'm back and on the right track.
      Hello,hello tell all of your friends, I'm back, as a matter of fact, I'm back!
      GOODNESS GRACIOUS....hello,hello.

      sorry ziggy couldn't resist.
      Welcome back. Had many discussions with you,in recent times under two previous names ( not including anon lol),both agreeing and disagreeing with you and I'm a life long bowie fan too.

      Double guffaw!

    4. aladdin ;)

    5. @ 13:47
      You got me bang to rights guv.

      I am the (piss) artist formerly known as Gordon Bennett and before that Aladdin's Insane.
      Now I'm just boring old anon.
      Like most I expect, I lose interest in the case and forget about it for a while.
      When I return, my enthusiasm for the truth rejuvenated, I adopt a new persona.

    6. the new persona being 'anon' ? lol

    7. @ 19:26
      Yeah I know,I haven't thought of a decent one yet.
      Any ideas? Apart from fool,idiot,etc,

    8. The Keen Genie ?

    9. Nice one ziggy
      Nice one

    10. Nice one, Sun.


  12. It seems you have attracted a lot of people who come to a blog discussing a missing child case extremely entertaining and loads of laughs.

    What weird people.

    1. 7th August 22:05
      Not laughing about the case, just general banter.
      There are some photos of the McCanns smiling or apparently in merry amusement and they should be the last people laughing.
      On second thoughts though, maybe they have good reason to.

    2. laughing ? smiling ? damn..must be murderers.A dead giveaway.Well spotted.

    3. You want me to ban laughter and all forms of merriment 22:05? Perhaps 'Abandon All Hope Ye who enter', or 'Though Shalt Not' over the door?

      Away with you you big eejit, or better still go join CMoMM, or MMM where po faces are mandatory.

    4. @ Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton9 August 2018 at 22:52

      I notice it took you 2 days to come up with that answer.
      If you want to have fun and laughter and merriment when discussing a missing child then carry on and I will carry on thinking that you are weird.

      Why not just start a general discussion blog where people can have fun and games?

  13. "And there are some people who have died in circumstances that might be described as mysterious - in particular a young relative of Dr Amaral living in London who was shot in the head at point-blank range on his doorstep in a killing that had weird echoes of the Jill Dando killing. Police described the killing as a case of 'mistaken identity'. To my knowledge the killer's were never found.
    Then of course there is Brenda Leyland. A very strange case indeed."

    Nothing strange here. Ricardo Cunha's killing is explained here

    Brenda Leyland's suicide is understandable given the person she was and the circumstances she found herself in. No need to look for a conspiracy.

    1. Anonymous 7 August 2018 at 22:45

      “Ricardo Cunha's killing is explained here”


      Metropolitan Police:

      “A post-mortem examination held at Greenwich Mortuary gave the cause of death as a gunshot wound to the head [TO THE HEAD. Think about it]
      Over the years detectives have continued to appeal for information and in 2011 they issued an image of a 1924 Webley Mark Six Revolver which may have been the murder weapon.

      They believe it could have been kept as a keepsake, with the possibility that it may have been stolen in an unreported burglary before finding its way into the hands of Ricardo's killer.

      Detectives know that the same gun [THE SAME GUN. Think about it] was fired during an incident just three days after Ricardo's murder. On Tuesday, 14 September 2010, it was fired in Picton House on the Clapham Park Estate, Brixton. No one was injured during the incident [NO ONE WAS INJURED. Think about it] and the gun was found [THE GUN WAS FOUND. BUT NO THE PERSON WHO HAD USED IT. Think about it] on the Clapham Manor Estate the following day. Forensics later identified that this type of gun [not “the same gun”] was used in Ricardo's murder.”

      “We believe that someone knows who shot an innocent man in his own home.”

      Believe me when I tell you I believe they believe.


      “Nothing strange here.”


      The chips are down.


    2. @Anonymous 8 August 2018 at 12:58

      How odd that you excluded this bit.

      "Detectives investigating the 2010 murder believe that the shooting was a case of mistaken identity and Ricardo, who was 23 at the time of his death, was never the intended target."

    3. Anonymous 8 August 2018 at 15:05

      Thank you for your remark, Speedy Gonzales. I like you.:)

      I’m odd. I am a prime.

      ‘Not included’, not “excluded”.

      You haven’t seen my hand (as in poker).

      The link is there for all to read,

      More haste, less speed.


  14. Hi Rosalinda,
    Congratulations on your blog. It is a fountain of information on a criminal case that won't go away.
    (Out on a limb, how can I paraphrase this as an example) even Rudolf Hess's doomed flight to Scotland pales in comparison to a case so fascinating that writers are still debating what really happened 77 years after the fact.)
    A number fast approaching the time frame of the tragic death of a little English girl in Portugal.

    I have to say this: As far as theater of the absurd goes. Going way back to the night of May 3rd-4th 2007, the night of the "Abduction" this scenario takes the cake.
    (One of your readers touched on the subject recently)

    Nothing ever has been so astonishing as the sight that met the two Portuguese police officers guarding the hotel room room where two cringing screaming British doctors pounded the floor in mock contrition.

    Excerpt: Jose M.B.R 21 years on the force;
    "Gerry placed both knees together and hit the floor with both hands.
    Placing himself like a praying Arab , he shouted twice in rage.
    There was no comment or expression from them , just crying, no tears, but produced sounds identical to crying".
    This officer felt it indicated no kidnapping had taken place although this was indicated by the father.

    The screaming and rage were no doubt genuine with the prospect of a looming murder trial uppermost on the couple's minds.
    But the genius uppermost in their minds propelled them as the marketing darlings of spin in the early internet days resulting not in the hoped for rescue of their reputation but condemnation from the world.

    Remember; these street fighters are still riding high.
    Sometimes you really can get away with murder, - not just anybody's murder.
    Your own daughter.

    1. Hi JC, you are right, the behaviour of the parents on the night was totally bizarre, it's no wonder the first police on the scene were so suspicious. I accept there is no book on how parents of a missing child should behave, but most of us are pretty sure, it's not like that.

      I can never get over the fact that they didn't search. Gerry and Kate immediately went to the worst possible scenario, that she had been taken out of the country or had been killed and that finding her was beyond their control.

      Most people, myself included, would have believed Madeleine was still in the vicinity, cowering in a bush perhaps. Even if she had been 'taken', her abductor may have tossed her aside, left her injured somewhere close by. Gerry had seen her alive and well at 9.15, so why were he and Kate thinking the worst? If your child is missing, surely you think of all the best case scenarios first. Eg. Perhaps she was upstairs with a kindly neighbour who heard her crying?

      The first two police on the scene found the situation surreal, which it was. The parents were already directing the police, claiming the child had been abducted. It reminded me of Jeremy Bamber who murdered his entire family. When the police arrived in that case, Bamber gave them a guided tour telling them what had happened, how it happened, and who was responsible. He blamed his mentally unstable sister who, having slain the entire family, committed suicide.

      Gerry and Kate were directing the way in which their case should be handled, from that very first night, they took charge of the narrative. I think by midnight they were distributing photographs of Madeleine (aged 2) and demanding that the borders be closed. Already they had plans to make the search international.

      The McCanns and their friends worked hard through the night of 3rd/4th May, not searching for the child, but contacting anyone and everyone who could promote the abduction story. And on the morning of 4th May, that was the news we all woke up to.

    2. jc

      ''Placing himself like a praying Arab , he shouted twice in rage...This officer felt it indicated no kidnapping had taken place although this was indicated by the father.''

      And to think the PJ have been criticised.

      ''The screaming and rage were no doubt genuine with the prospect of a looming murder trial uppermost on the couple's minds.''

      Why 'no doubt' , Sherlock ?

      ''Sometimes you really can get away with murder, - not just anybody's murder.
      Your own daughter.''

      And if you hang around blogs talking tripe you can get away with slander.

    3. '' contacting anyone and everyone who could promote the abduction story. And on the morning of 4th May, that was the news we all woke up to.''

      What was the official line of inquiry the police were 'promoting' without being asked ? An abduction by any chance ? Or your morbid murder novel ?

  15. Hi Anonymous at 13:31

    You probably meant libel.
    Slander is spoken. Libel being written.
    Anyway, without splitting hairs, in this case it would be the "Truth".
    Between postings take some time to read Amaral's book "The Truth of the Lie" and clue yourself in as to what really happened.

    1. If that book is an account of what really happened why didn't he arrest anyone ?The clumsy title aside, it is a book of theories and suspicions.The over-quoted 'judges decision'( regarding whether or not it should be published- NOT a criminal charge against a McCann) came with an important caveat ( that's a condition or proviso, jc). That was that it was being allowed to stock the shelves ( and Amaral's bank account) n the understanding that it was NOT as a book of facts( sorry about the 'f' bomb)but merely a 'literary work'. That was a veiled warning, or good advice for those empty headed vultures who wanted to quote it as a file from Interpol. You obviously didn't understand that.But you speak for many, unfortunately.

    2. @ anon (ziggy) 22:22

      I'm not jc,just butting in here.

      Although what you say is strictly correct in a legal sense,Amaral must believe what he has written and has seen first hand the evidence and sat in on interviews etc.
      You and I haven,t, so who are we to doubt his account. He may not have had enough evidence for a conviction but that does not necessarily mean his version his wrong as you seem to argue.

      I am never quite sure if you think there is not enough evidence to convict, nor ever will be and there was a cover up of some kind, or if the Mccanns are completely innocent apart from possible neglect.
      Please explain yourself man

    3. LOL, so the Judge directed 'The Truth of the Lie' (great title) should be read as fiction. Do you have any idea how pathetic that sounds? Do you think a Judge has the power to direct a reader on how to interpret a book?

      The Truth of the Lie, is GA's personal account of the original investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance. Nobody, absolutely, nobody, is going to read it as fiction.

    4. ''LOL, so the Judge directed 'The Truth of the Lie' (great title) should be read as fiction. Do you have any idea how pathetic that sounds? Do you think a Judge has the power to direct a reader on how to interpret a book?''

      The judge added the proviso to explain to the likes of you why it was being allowed to be published.Clearly she should have made it even more simple...

      Did i say it was a work of fiction or are you saying that i did so you can try to shoot me down ? I said it was a book filled with theories and suspicions.And that's what it is.If there was a fact that supported his suspicions arrests would have been made and the parents would be due for parole by now.His personal account is his reflection on who said what and when and what he suspected and why, from Murat(twice)to the parents to the tapas group. He was sure the body was on Murat's property even though he suspected it had been secretly cremated but buried.Nobody with an open or balanced mind is going to read his book as a guide to solving anything but insomnia.Live with it.

    5. Anonymous9 August 2018 at 08:21

      Amaral had 25 years experience on the force, very little at all in cases of child abduction.Either way, he should have known that a policeman needs a lot more than a suspicion to get a conviction.His only other effort in the area saw him land in trouble and the parent( mother) turned out to be guilty.That was a different case and it doesn't mean all parents are guilty in those circumstances.Regardless of his account, he wanted a tail on Murat for 24 hours ( because he suspected the parents?) and he had him in for questioning twice. Then he moved his focus to the parents with equal conviction.If he believed his own version of imagined events, how can it be that the child was dead, stored in a fridge, secreted in a coffin for a secret cremation, then, weeks later, transported in a hire care for burial ?He explains the findings of the forensics in the UK as being 'tampered' with. This is a man selling the 'truth of the lie' ? No sale Gonco...

      There isn't nor ever will be any evidence to convict anyone.Not now.That ship sailed weeks after the event.They were guilty of neglect and careless and they paid the worst possible price.That doesn't make them murderers,paedophiles,money launderers,mafia or witches.Keep it real.If they were any of the above why would the politicians go to so much trouble to protect them ?The protection has existed- but why ?

    6. Or to put it differently:

      The McCanns sued for damages.

      They hoped Dr Amaral’s book would be banned.

      They failed to prove their case.

      Their hopes have not materialised.

      Never mind the unofficial English title, the book is on sale in several languages all over the world.

      I don’t have a problem with the title, neither do hundreds of thousands of other readers.

      I would suggest the books are for reading, not for wasting time discussing their titles.

      What else is there to say?

      Two exceedingly clever Englishmen published a very complex three-volume work on the foundations of mathematics. Eighteen years thereafter, a 25-year-old Austrian published a paper proving that they wasted there time.

      The grand title of the three volumes was Principia Mathematica

      What’s in the title?

      War or Peace?:)


    7. "...they had wasted their time."

      My English is drunk.


    8. The title, T, old chum shouldn't matter in this case but it does.It does because it's being used as the holy grail by those who make up the mob as literally the truth about literally a lie(s).No truths and no lies are proven by Amaral.They're his opinion and his theorising.But the rabble choose to use the book as truth.This is why i reminded readers of the judges proviso. She considered that important for a reason.She underestimated the junk food mentality of the social networkers.

      If you had lost a child and that child didn't appear to be coming back any time soon how would you feel ?Then to see the original lead detective is accusing you of burying your child ?But it's considered wrong or outrageous to want revenge on someone who was trying to spread that word as far and wide as possible or to sue for defamation and slander or libel ?One spec of evidence could justify his crusade.He and his friends at the PJ haven't been able to produce it in 12 years.He can find nothing beyond his theories.The martyr Amaral so full of compassion knew exactly how the parents would feel.The least he could provide to justify his twisted rambling is solid evidence or Madeleine herself.He didn't nor ever will.All he's done is vent via a book and unloaded some poison intended to assassinate the characters and reputations of two people who lost a child he failed to find.

    9. Like it or not 16:13 and 16:26, Gongalo Amaral's book 'The Truth of the lie' is THE definitive book on the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. You say GA failed to prove his claim the parents were involved, but equally, the parents, all their detectives, spin doctors, etc, have failed to disprove any of GA's theories. If they had, perhaps they would have won their civil actions against him. They have failed to prove that his theories are incorrect or in any way flawed. That is, they have failed to prove their innocence. Neither the child or an abductor has materialised in 11+ years.

      It is bizarre that you are now trying to denigrate GA's book, the witnesses for the McCanns were quite clear, it was a well written book by a detective who was central to the original investigation. That was the thrust of their claim, lol. Now you are just sounding like sore losers.

    10. "Anonymous9 August 2018 at 19:49

      "...they had wasted their time."

      My English is drunk.


      No surprise there - have you been on your date with Ros yet - she enjoys a drink too,

    11. It is the definitive book of Amaral's various and contradictory theories. It's the meandering of a befuddled man who should have known better; a man flailing in the dark and tilting at windmills. It's little wonder that those who cling to it as though it's the only thing keeping them afloat are those who won't discuss evidence or logicas it's above their heads and spoils the twisted fun.

      How am i sounding like sore losers ? And why use the plural ? Are you typing through the bottom of a glass again ?

    12. Roz, if Amaral had any proof or evidence behind the theories in his book, he would have published it in the UK. But neither he nor his publishers have published because they know that in the UK, unlike Portugal, the onus is upon them to provide that evidence. It makes you wonder about the morality of the man, that he actually put into print theories and suppositions that he could not prove and, indeed, financially benefited from those theories, also bearing in mind that those theories seemed to change from day to day.


    13. I'm not sure what you mean Gary, and I don't think you are either. Goncalo Amaral if you remember was taken off the investigation. Ergo, had he continued as he was going, there were likely to be arrests. Check out the interim report of Taveres De Ameida.

      That he was not allowed to continue those lines of enquiry are pretty much what we have been arguing about for 11+ years!

      You sound as though you are among the McCann supporters who have NOT read GA's book. His book was his account of what happened during the summer of 2007.

      You say he should by now have done a follow up, producing evidence etc. Again, he was no longer part of the investigation, he was not in a position to pursue his planned lines of enquiry.

      Instead of insisting GA write a second book, why haven't the McCanns rebutted everything they disagreed with in the first one? Yes, Kate wrote 'Madeleine', but she lost her opportunity to stand up to GA by failing to tackle any of the conclusions he reached. You, yourself, seem unsure of them Gary.

      Goncalo Amaral did what he set out to do. He cleared his name and reputation. He has probably had enough of this case to last him a lifetime. He is fortunate in that circumstances uncovered his talent for writing, and I'm sure with 30/40 years as a detective, he has plenty of material to write about.

      It could be said Kate McCann benefitted financially from her book Gary. How do you feel about that from a moral perspective?

    14. Again with the battle of the books...

      A child is missing.Remember ?

      Amaral's book is merely an account of what happened is it ? That's it ? No pointing of fingers ?No accusations ? No bizarre theorizing about what happened to the child or that the parents are lying criminals ?It's just an account of what happened.I can't believe you even read with those cast iron blinkers on.It's a neurosis..

      KM's book wasn't in bad taste or libelous.It could be viewed as therapeutic.Then again, so could Amaral's ; it must have been cathartic for him to rant - even if he couldn't back a single word up.As for moral perspectives.That's too silly to comment on given the contrast.

      Amaral's colleagues and friends weren't removed from the case.Why couldn't they pursue his so called lines of inquiry ? Or didn't they read the book.

      As for the McCanns not rebutting everything in Amaral's rambling, what do you think the idea was when they tried to sue for defamation and libel? They should have gone to the ECHR. I hoped they would.In the meantime, thanks to the internet, Amaral grows fat on illicit profiteering.

  16. Reverend T. Ben. Nit8 August 2018 at 21:21

    Good God!

    Is it true?
    The Second Cumming has occurred?
    Zesus himself is back?

    Good God!
    I knew in my innermost soul he would return and I have been saving a bottle of Buckfast ( 2017 vintage) for just this event.

    I propose a toast......To Bruvver Zesus (or Mark if you prefer) of Liverpool.
    And give thanks and praises for his glorious return.

    Amen to that!

  17. Re 22:22
    Looks like Z has returned to this site. Earnest grammar is a giveaway. No input other than tear down.

    If the title of Amaral's book "The Truth of the Lie" is "clumsy" then it's time for this person to check into the nearest insane asylum.

    Goncalo Amaral's book is a best seller in Portugal, France, - indeed all of Europe, and embraced by the world.

    Only in Britain where pre Magna Carta sentiments still hold sway are people prevented from learning the truth.

    1. @ jc

      West Ryder Pauper Lunatic Asylum is not too far from

    2. Jc
      You can't even reproduce a quote properly.I called the title of the book clumsy.It is.

      It doesn't matter how many books were sold. That refelects public taste and /or mentality.Fifty shades of Gray sold more- is that to be taken as high art or a guide to fun for the bored in bed ?As a detective, Amaral is a shrewd author.Why hasn't his successor or former superiors read it and acted ? Take a guess.

    3. Anonymous 9 August 2018 at 11:27

      “West Ryder Pauper Lunatic Asylum is not too far from Liverpool”

      Bravissimo (in a continuous loop)! :))))))))))))))))))))))


      PS I’ll always be visiting, comrade.

    4. Instead of ziggy booking himself into a mental hospital,he could get someone to place him in a straitjacket.The only way he will be able to type then is by tapping the keys with a pencil grasped between his teeth.
      That should slow him up a bit.And give us some peace too.

    5. Brevity is the soul of wit.

    6. As an afterthought, brother ζ.

      In the present state of the Universe I will myself likely end up in West Riding Pauper Lunatic Asylum. Perhaps Friedrich, you and I could share a room? Would you mind? We could wear our foil hats all day long, scream, arm wrestle, chase nurses down those wonderful Victorian corridors and terrify other co-conspirators and visitors. Oooh… I can dream no end... And I could change the title of my memoirs from Intimate Diaries of a Madman to T with Friedrich and Ziggmund… Or do you think it would be too clumsy? Колька Gogol would be visiting with food parcel, he’s got a heart of gold (or is it silver?). Whatever. He’d be visiting. Don’t you think at’s a grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrreat idea?

      I’ve just figured out your wave function, It’s not recursive, my Sun. Also I’ve been composing an ode to you, and, strangely enough, a perfect stranger tells me of ‘odd’.
      Sounds conspiratorial to me. Please give it a thought. A prime in my prime, I don’t care. Put me in a cage, I’ll try to finish my Cantos. Worked fine for Ezra. Another prime chaser he was. Could string words like pearls. Diamond of a bloke. And a good-looker. You remind me of him

      The skies are taking the piss pissing. Miracles. A stroll across a field, ζ?


    7. peace = where logic isn't welcome.Fool.

    8. @ T
      You crack me up T.

    9. @08.03

      Oh dear me… Come, come… A couple of panadols. Pull at this. There.. There… Feeling better now? I’m so sorry. I didn’t mean to hurt.


      PS I take it you are not Flesh [Gordon] the Up-uncrackable,:)

    10. @ T
      One and the same. ( I was going to laugh but I might upset somebody)

    11. 9 August 2018 at 22:43

      memo to T..the maverick with rebellious braces and waxed tash...a fine, handsome young fellow with a noble’s the poets are your like—fine, fiery fellows with great rages when their temper’s aroused.

      It's always nice to receive such interesting (if surreal) would be a pleasure to share a cell and haunt the corridors molesting nurses with your good self.I was growing tired of the place...

      after drinking for weeks, rising up in the red dawn, or before it maybe, and going out into the yard as naked as a tree in the moon...shying clods against the visage of the stars till i put the fear of death into the banhbs and the screeching sows,i found myself in need of a stronger challenge..and here we are..

      So, let's frolic like things gone mad and allow no meadow to escape our riot..we can be heroes..just for one day..I'll bring my charm, you bring some snacks and poteen..and they'll see our backs grow smaller in the distance and concede that i had words that could capsize the very stars..

      Go on now and I’ll see you from this day stewing my oatmeal and washing my spuds, for I’m master of all fights from now

    12. 10 August 2018 at 22:50

      Chairman Mao to Comrade Hurricane

      Dear Comrade

      Do not kill me please! I should love to die laughing but not just yet.

      Please come and sit by my side, Comrade, to watch the sun rising.

      The bottles they are full. The goblets they are a-sparklin’. Imperialist pigs they a-roastin’.

      You and I will sip, smile and spit. And spit. And spit. And spit.

      You may bring T with you. We could see how good he is at spitting.

      I look forward to your coming at your earliest convenience.


  18. "Issued by University of Leicester on 7 August 2018

    A cardiology consultant from Leicester has been awarded a prestigious research professorship from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR).

    Professor Gerry McCann, cardiology consultant at Leicester’s Hospitals and professor of cardiac imaging at the University of Leicester, is just one of five eminent medical researchers in the country to have received the award in this round in a highly competitive process. It is the first time anyone in Leicester has been accepted on the programme.

    The aim of the NIHR Research Professorships programme is to “fund future research leaders to promote the effective translation of research from bench to bedside”. This means taking what is learnt in laboratories to improve patient care as quickly as possible.

    The post lasts for five years and is supported by £1.95 million to increase the capacity of Professor McCann and his team to conduct more research in his area of expertise – using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to study the early signs of heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes in order to improve diagnosis and management of the condition."

    Well done.

    1. But what if…’The higher you climb,…’?


    2. @ T

      The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.

    3. Anonymous 9 August 2018 at 22:10


      I’ve told you that blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.


    4. Hello Anon 9 August 2018 at 10:19

      I had to look it up myself as you referred to the press release. Just a few thoughts here.

      ”Leicester cardiology consultant awarded prestigious research professorship
      Posted by ap507 at Aug 07, 2018 10:20 AM | Permalink
      Professor Gerry McCann has been awarded a prestigious research professorship from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)
      Issued by University of Leicester on 7 August 2018
      A cardiology consultant from Leicester has been awarded a prestigious research professorship from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)”

      Taking great interest in linguistic matters, I find it strange that Leicester University in their press release uses the indefinite article “a cardiology consultant”, instead of the definite article, “the cardiologist or the cardiology consultant Gerry McCann”, especially as the person is so well known all over the world and beyond his profession.

      What Gerry McCann has achieved in terms of scientific research has of course no bearing on the Madeleine case, so there’s no reason for Leicester University to mention that in their release, but journalists should, unless there’re laws or press ethics preventing them from doing so. Therefore, I really hope that British MSM makes it perfectly clear to all their readers who this Professor McCann really is, and that he is much more than just a successful researcher at the University of Leicester.

      Just as Dr Jekyll in Stevenson’s novel, Gerry tries hard to separate his professional career as a doctor and scientist from his true immoral and remorseless personality, in his private life and the press release in question helps him a little bit in this regard.

      Nevertheless, no matter how successful Gerry will become as a scientist, he and his wife will always bear the full responsibility for the loss of their daughter and they cannot hide their true personalities forever. Dr Jekyll couldn’t.

    5. So, stretching your vague literary illusion even further, are you suggesting both the parents have split personalities now ?Or did you just feel the need again to cite a classic piece of literature once again to appear intellectual.I sometimes wonder if Ros takes a snort of something for research purposes, falls to her knees, then reappears as Bjorn.It's a shame the names don't ring as well as Jekyll and Hyde. Maybe her book could eventually become ' Bjorn again'

    6. Anonymous 10 August 2018 at 22:02

      With all due deference to Rosalinda and Björn.

      Magic! Wonderful, comrade! You never fail to make me laugh. Give me some water, my dear, I need to rinse my dentures before I put them back in.

      “Of the things which nourish the imagination, humour is one of the most needful, and it is dangerous to limit or destroy it.”
      Attributed to John Millington Synge, a Dubliner.

      Thanks, comrade.


    7. @ ziggy 10th August 22:02

      As it is strongly rumoured that Ros wears a wig it should be relatively easy to become Bjorn.No need to snort the sherbert. Just change wigs.
      Even easier if Bjorn is unlike the stereotypical Nordic and is actually bald. Just take her wig off and become like Textusa, a cross dresser,but in reverse:)

    8. well spotted T. :)

    9. Yes I do indeed remember the glee in the McCann camp, when one among them decided I was bald and wearing a wig (they were hoping it was cancer).

      Eat your heart out 13:19, I have a lush,full head of Paddy hair, that grows more quickly, and even thicker, with every passing year. It is a hairdresser's dream, they can do anything with it.

      You can knock my intellect, my spelling and my grammar, lol, but nobody messes with the Do!

    10. @ Ros
      My comment was tongue in cheek. Cancer never even entered my head until you mentioned it.
      Apologies if you thought my attempt at humour was in bad taste.

    11. Dear Anon10 August 2018 at 22:02
      and thanks for comment

      ”So, stretching your vague literary illusion even further, are you suggesting both the parents have split personalities now ?Or did you just feel the need again to cite a classic piece of literature once again to appear intellectual”

      I find the philosophical reasoning about the good and the bad sides of human nature in the end of the novel very interesting (Dr Jekyll’s letter), which I thought could be discussed in the context of the Madeleine case. That’s all.

      Writers, whose works have become classic literature, have had the ability to understand and illustrate complex events in history often from the perspective of ordinary people. It is not just their intellectualism and eloquence, but just as much their life experiences, their morals and above all, their ability to understand people's life situations that make readers of all times learn more about themselves and others.

      Those who read Dostoyevsky, Stevenson, Stendahl, Charlotte Brontë or any other author of classic literature may better understand, why some people commit crimes and why some of them believe that they can live a harmonious and a happy life for the rest of their lives if they just manage to escape justice by lying.

      Finally, nobody becomes intellectual (I’m not) by reading and citing classical literature, but it may open up new perspectives on a subject that is being discussed, and that’s the reason as to why I sometimes refer to classic literature.

    12. Hi Bjorn, the 'Gothic' was one of the modules I studied at University, the ideas of dual personalities and automatons. What it is that makes us human. And of course, there is nothing more delicious than studying than studying human behaviour from the dark side. I was fortunate to discover, or to have introduced to me, Edgar Alan Poe. His short, spooky, stories was my just before nodding off reading, as a teen. He frightened the bejesus out of me, but I always came back for more, lol.

      Jekyll and Hyde. Probably at the top of personality disorders, but equally, there is a little bit of J&H in each of us. I have the fairly unique distinction of having being diagnosed, by two psychiatrists, as having multiple personality disorder. It was a bit of a 'eat your heart out Stephen Fry', one up from bipolar disorder.

      I've always been a bit blasé about the multiple personalities, doesn't everyone have a character for every situation? I'm not religious, but I think we each have God given or genetic traits that get us through any situation, at any given time. We can be warriors, we can be diplomats.

      I, apparently, transform, physically, and did so in front of a Court full of lawyers and note takers. I changed from one character to another before their eyes. It was a great ‘Sybil’ moment, and I’d even have Sally Field playing the part. Apparently we look quite similar and she does lunacy brilliantly! Sadly, I do not have the ability to transform at will, like Batman or Wonder Woman, my more assertive selves usually step in when I least expect it. It totally throws those who try to take advantage of my good nature, and even myself, I live in fear of the mad woman in the attic, what if she takes control?

      But most of this I say in jest, like Marilyn Monroe, ‘they think I’m crazy; but I’m 100% there’. I think in order to write Bjorn, you have to explore those deep, dark hidden fears. I confessed, just the other day, my terror of losing words, that dementia or something equally horrific will rob me of my ability to express myself clearly. I worked for a while with people who had learning disabilities and mental health problems. It was the most rewarding of every job I ever had. The people I worked with, were like normal people, but with all the evil stripped away. Innocents in adult bodies, who still saw the world in a way that most of us have long forgotten. I learned more about human nature and human behavior in that job than I did in all the jobs and studying that had gone before. Autism. Bipolar, Schizophrenia, OCD, BPD, tick, tick, tick, all of us have traits of all of them, some to greater and lesser degree, some where the condition is totally debilitating.

    13. But to return to the Jekyll and Hyde. Whoever is hiding this terrible secret is living J&H. They thought they had Hyde covered up forever, they shapeshifted him into a swarthy predator, a hidden child snatcher, a real life bogeman to frighten not only the kids but the parents too. Quite literally, apparently the parents of of children attending a Kids Cinema, were outraged at the McCanns campaign telling their kids they could be next.

      Gerry and Kate McCann are truly fascinating. Their decision to make their tragedy global news and their cause public, created a monster they couldn't control. The world started to see them in an entirely different light.

      It's their 'blame everyone but themselves' attitude that I find the most baffling Bjorn. These are two adults who seem to accept no responsibility whatsoever for everything that has happened to them. It's always someone else's fault.

      Hard as it is to fully embrace the concept that we alone are responsible for everything that happens to us, most people reach that light bulb moment in early adulthood. Narcissists never do. On hearing of his niece's tragic suicide, Hitler responded 'how could she do this to ME'.

      It is actually quite liberating when you accept that you alone are responsible for all your life choices, even the bad ones. We all achieve our goals, even the ones we were not aware of.

      Gerry and Kate first presented as the much loved centre couple of two large, supportive families. Their positions in their families, only child and youngest sibling, made them more protected than most. Both were obviously doted on as both have a sense of entitlement that goes above the norm. Their successful lives I would say, were mapped out for them at a very early age and they had lived up to all expectations. Nothing could possibly go wrong, could it.

    14. Hello Rosalinda and thanks for feed back

      Yes the J&H theme is highly relevant to the McCann case

      Unlike normal people who commit crimes and live in constant fear of being revealed, narcissistic and autistic criminals often become strengthened the longer they manage to dupe the judiciary and people around them. Such people can also challenge society in situations where they do not need to do so even if they end up in an even more difficult situation
      The whole lie process may become an enjoyable game to which they eventually may become addicted.

      The Madeleine case had probably never become a British case after the Portuguese had shelved their investigation, if the McCanns hadn’t asked for it and the Portuguese PJ probably wouldn’t have re-opened their part of it either and it would’ve been difficult for the McCanns to keep the myth of the kidnapping alive. Through Missing People and Kate's role in it, the myth has been further enhanced and sincerely, I believe that both Gerry and Kate are mighty proud of what they’ve achieved so far and I also believe that they enjoy duping others by pretending to look for Madeleine, and that has nothing to do with money to their fund. It’s just the way they are. Gerry’s “ask the dogs Sandra”which was said by him with an explicit duping smile, shows that the McCanns’ process of self-destructing duping attitudes started long ago

    15. I cannot help but agree with your Bjorn, there is no mistaking their delight in duping. The Expresso interview for example, neither can hide their glee at the Portuguese investigation being shelved. It was wholly inappropriate - effectively, there was no longer an official search for their daughter.

      Then there is the classic moment when Gerry cannot help grinning when the interviewer asks about sightings of Madeleine. It has been captured many times, there is no mistaking what it is.

      Then there is the interview where Gerry and Kate are publicising the aged progressed picture of Madeleine. I can't imagine a more distressing situation, but Gerry gets the giggles, he cannot suppress his laughter.

      The McCann supporters hate the idea that body language and forensic linguistics have given the game away for the McCanns, but they are plain to see. There is another video, where the demeanour of the McCanns changes entirely, because they think the cameras have been switched off. That's just plain deceptive.

      As you say, the case could have been swept under the carpet and forgotten by all, except a persistent few. Their own need to keep it in public eye, is the reason Operation Grange exists, and the Portuguese file was re-opened. That, together with Gerry's taunting of the police with 'there's nooooooo evidence'. It's hardly surprising some are taking it as a challenge.

    16. Hi again Rosalinda
      "Then there is the classic moment when Gerry cannot help grinning when the interviewer asks about sightings of Madeleine. It has been captured many times, there is no mistaking what it is"
      So true. Anyone can find this U2-clip. That smile was almost just as explicit as that in the Sandra interview. When I first saw it, I really got scared and wondered if Gerry completely lacked normal feelings. You don't have to be a psychologist to see that something is so wrong in his attitude towards his "beloved" daughter.

  19. This man is truly a saint.

    1. @ 19:45

      What T or ziggy? Or both?

    2. @ Anonymous9 August 2018 at 21:01

      Neither - by a long shot.

  20. RE: 10:19

    That's a very interesting snippet of information from the University of Leicester you posted.
    Being awarded a 1.95 million pound contract plus a 5 year tenure too. Some naysayers might be thinking; - "Gravy train". But that would be cruel.

    Quote. "To fund future research leaders to promote the effective translation of research from bench to bedside"

    The kind bafflegab that does not pass much of a "translation" test.

    Jealousy notwithstanding "Professor" McCann got himself a gold plated job.

    The cringing and the flailing on the floor in the 5A apartment 11 years earlier certainly paid off as a kind of penance for someone shrewd enough to be able to see the future, - and sensed his life could easily come crashing down before his eyes.

    Who would have thought this man would emerge as the brightest light in modern medicine.

    I sincerely hope his abducted daughter is soon found and he can give her the same devotion and love as his present area of expertise - when the two of them reunite.

    Somehow a film title comes to mind. The 1987 movie, "The Untouchables" - but I see it was not a movie about doctors, was about Al Capone. Oh well.

    1. @ jc 01:48

      And what have you done in life?
      You are sick - why Ros publishes your rubbish is questionable at least.

    2. I happen to enjoy JC's eloquent prose 00:58, though I can see why you would find it objectionable.

      Kudos to Gerry in being so driven in his career. That is quite an accomplishment, especially given his very special circumstances. If he had been charged with child neglect or whatever in 2007, it is doubtful any of that would have been possible. It is a pretty strong motive to keep your name and reputation unsullied. Perhaps that is partially way, it was so important to discredit Goncalo Amaral.

    3. ''I happen to enjoy JC's eloquent prose''

      I'd love to think you were being ironic.You weren't though were you. You've promoted another nutter on the grounds he agrees with you.

  21. Well,judging by the comments count,the return of the zigmeister has certainly had an impact.

    Love him or hate him, he's a crowd puller.

    1. @08:33

      Concur: comrade Rising Sun Is by a long stretch the best and most charming visiting crowd-puller I’ve come across.

      If you are here to pull, pull on whatever you pull on and please mind the queue.:)


    2. Ros banned ziggy a long time ago - what short memories people have. Does no-one remember all the comments imploring Ros to get rid of him?

    3. Whilst tis true I grew bored with Ziggy's endless diatribes, I don't have facilities to ban anyone - or if I have, I don't know how to use them, lol. In any event, he always returned in different guises, so banning would have been pointless.

      I know others complained about him, but for me, I don't see the written word as a threat. I have no need to conceal anything he has to say.

    4. What with ziggy sawdust posting (posing) again and with the return of T and JJ too, all we need now for a full house like the old days,is for Jane Cook, Blacksmith and Unknown to do likewise.
      I know the whereabouts of Jane and JB (Textusa and NT respectively), but as for Unknown,well,that is unknown.

    5. @01:01

      To paraphrase Jonathan Swift, a Dubliner: When a great master appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him.


    6. Anonymous 11 August 2018 at 11:12

      Please add ‘NT’ to yor list.


    7. NT was Unknown

    8. 11 August 2018 at 01:01

      ''Ros banned ziggy a long time ago - what short memories people have. Does no-one remember all the comments imploring Ros to get rid of him?''

      Why don't you take Ziggy's arguments apart and challenge him with stronger alternatives instead of running to teacher ?

    9. The boy Swift was on the money, T..

      Dunces...dunces..bless 'em..

    10. ''In any event, he always returned in different guises, so banning would have been pointless. ''

      Actually, Ros,The correct reply should have been along the lines of '' I revile anything and everything about banning freedom of expression.'' Remember when you used to pretend that was your stance when you were trying to appear 'cool' ?

      You should challenge him with something more potent occasionally instead of trying to portray him as boring with his 'diatribes' ( pot /kettle ?). But, like your minions, you can only make back handed personal, childish remarks.That kind of argument is a constant bullet in your own foot.

      He's good for your blog.Your faithful followers are too kind to remind you of that.And far more entertaining than virtually every other contributor.

    11. Anonymous 11 August 2018 at 13:33



  22. 1 Nov 2007

    'While Mrs McCann has confirmed she will not be returning to her job as a GP, Mr McCann always said he would return to his job.

    Neither have earned anything since May and some instalments of the couple's mortgage on their home in Rothley have been paid from the Find Madeleine fund.

    Doug Skehan, clinical director of the Glenfield's cardio-respiratory directorate, said he was confident Mr McCann could handle a return to his £75,000-a-year post, adding: "His trauma is well known but his professionalism is high. Many people who work in hospital have difficulties outside but they do engage with their clinical practice."

    Mr McCann, who remains an official suspect in his daughter's disappearance in Portugal, specialises in general cardiology and has a sub-speciality of MRI scanning of the heart and his return will be phased.

    He will initially split his time between assessing the results of MRI scans of patients, which involves "limited contact", and research for the British Heart Foundation.'

  23. @ 8:33
    Most of the comments are done by soredust himself, a few by T after he has been on the 'sauce' and the rest by that fool who laughs at his own jokes.
    Hardly a crowd.

    1. says devoted follower 11:12

      Tough crowd.

    2. It's the way I tell 'em!

      Would boom boom be more acceptable for you 11:12?

      Although having said that, the lol I often use is old school I suppose and I should get used to emojis like :) and similar.
      New fangled? Apparently not, as the OMD song Isotype last year pointed out. (I'm also a near life long fan...they started later than Bowie and from your home city too ziggy.
      I didn't know about the pictorial language from the 30's until that song , so texting short hand is actually old hat.
      But then again most things have been done before. :)

  24. 11:12

    Well by my reckoning that makes three.
    How does that saying go again?
    And just for you, an extra big LOL.

  25. Anonymous 5 August 2018 at 11:00

    Excellent comment.

    Thank you.


    1. @ T 17:14

      So excellent it took you 5 days to notice it! Were you sobering up?

    2. Anonymous 11 August 2018 at 01:04

      @ T 17:14

      I stand by my comment.

      “So excellent it took you 5 days to notice it!”

      That’s nonsense. Try to work out yourself why, it is simple. If you can’t do it yourself and have no one to ask, please feel free to ask me nicely, and I will explain in due course..

      “Were you sobering up?”

      No, I wasn’t. Yes, I was. Choose the one you like, (A helpful hint: There’s no need to invoke the axiom of choice.)

      Please don’t ask me personal questions unless you are insured for being showered with the remnants in my gut of the analeptic swigs, which it gratefully accepted and wants to keep.


  26. @ Mr Sawdust
    I know what your views are regarding lack of evidence etc and that you are sure there never will be enough either,so what is your position on Grange? Legit or not? And how do you think it will end? If it closes that is and not left 'open and on file'.

    1. 22:18

      grange is a's more smoke and mirrors.I believe it was put together to answer doubters and the gesture was the biggest in the case.By the time it was formed their wasn't a shred or spec of anything to be found so it was safe.Some of the higher ranking officers would know- it's all par fir the freemason course-and lower ranking officers might know too but won't say. The whole thing became a political circus as soon as Blair and Brown jumped on it.How many crimes since this one have received political attention and funding ?None.They get investigated by police forces.This has been reshaped and edited by politics and that doesn't happen in any crime, be it murder or abduction.Unless somebody in politics is compromised.Find out who that is, the case will begin to close.Until then, it will phase out because it will be'in public interest' to stop funding it.Given the length of apparent inquiries the public will accept it.So will the parents.Only the nutters will keep it on life support online..

    2. Your post makes no sense 23:01. If you are trying to cover something up, you don't announce it with a fanfare of publicity and you don't appoint 38 homicide officers. If OG were a cover up, then the careers of everyone involved, including the 38 homicide officers are seriously compromised.

      Governments change, those in charge in 2007 are long gone. Why would the tories compromise themselves to cover up 'errors' made by New Labour. Why would 38 homicide officers compromise their futures to 'save' Drs. Gerry and Kate McCann?

      I have no doubt that someone who was once on high, held what the Russians call 'kompromat' on a number of mouthpieces. But that was then, several changes of government ago, and even a week is a long time in politics. All the old Blair appointees are long gone.

      Your post sounds more like wishful thinking than a rational interpretation of what could be going on. A cover up on the scale you suggest is ludicrous. Politicians are under more scrutiny from the media than any other profession. Their crimes, and we have seen many over the years, are quickly uncovered. May and Cameron have no reason to cover up for a Labour government. All those detectives are human beings with human emotions. I doubt any one of them would cover up the death of a child.

    3. There is no evidence whatsoever that there was a squad of 38 homicide detectives.

      It is pure spin.

      Their career will not be compromised, as they were never appointed to OG in the first place.

      OG is run by the Home Secretary both Labour and Tory, not
      Scotland Yard and legally has no jurisdiction to investigate anything that happened in Portugal.

      The UK police have lied and deceived from day one and nothing has or will change.

      Last year the Government confirmed the Leicestershire police as the worst in the country for concealing crimes and ineptitude (24,000 unrecorded crimes).

      Nothing has changed since 2007.

    4. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton11 August 2018 at 09:28

      My post does make sense.You just have to open your mind and understand the difference between a sham and a cover up. I'm asserting that OG may well say 'investigation' on the label but the label is a lie. their progress and the developments since support this.

      You also need to understand that governments are also a sham in similar fashion.If we watch and listen to PM question time like good sheep we come away believing that Red and Blue are enemies. We believe that the UK is essentially a two party state with others making up the numbers for floating voters.But they don't have cameras present when the Chipping Norton Set meet for cocktails and Pimms and Tony and David et al enjoy their get- togethers.And who saved the day for Cameron at the Scottish Referendum ? Former (Scottish and Labour) PMs, Blair and Brown.The banks run the world and we know who runs them.So you can forget the illusion of them being enemies. Do some reading on Bilderberg Club.

      ''Your post sounds more like wishful thinking than a rational interpretation of what could be going on. A cover up on the scale you suggest is ludicrous''

      That's the second time you've put words into my mouth in order to say the post is ludicrous.I never mentioned cover up.Nice try though( for you).

      ''All those detectives are human beings with human emotions. I doubt any one of them would cover up the death of a child.''

      That's three times.Detectives didn't come up with the idea of OG.They were just called in to carry it out.Where these kinds of orders come from, nothing and nobody is sacred.

    5. You are not a teacher are you, 14:44. If you were, you would realise that preaching and telling a person what they 'should' believe tends to have the opposite effect. Who are 'you' to tell me what I should believe? You are overlooking the fact that I have freewill and the fact that I am quite capable of analysing facts and reaching my own conclusions.

      You accuse me of having a one track mind. Wrong. I have examined this case from EVERY perspective, even from the parents. And I have to say, their defence and spokesmen thus far have made their situation a hundred times worse. There isn't a decent writer among the lot of them.

      You are attempting to portray all those detectives as automatons, I pity you, that your faith in human nature has sunk that low.

      Politicians, and even ministers, cannot use the security forces for their own personal gain. Trump tried it with the FBI, and look where it has got him.

      The police are not an arm of the government, that is, they are not 'minions' (your fav word?)for politicians. I'm not saying they haven't been used unscrupulously in the past, or that they might be in the future, but it simply isn't practicable in this case - apart from being morally unsound.

    6. extremely weak response ros

    7. Before travelling abroad a UK copper must go through many evaluations and permissions and must have their authorisation signed by a senior politician, the Home Secretary (section 26).

      Without it the UK copper is committing a criminal offence.

      There is no shade of grey.

      It was not Blair or Brown running the circus, but John Reid, the known drunk, thief and thug.

      The UK police have never in this case followed the evidence but have followed the politicians instructions.

      The farce money does not come from the police budget, but from the politicians inexhaustible slush fund (aka tax payers pocket).

  27. Interesting ziggy.
    I liked your comment about Ros morphing into Bjorn by the way.
    Long flowing blonde hair complete with short beard and moustache. A Bjorn again Borg :).

    Anyway,if I got you right, the parents are innocent apart from possible negligence and a cover up took place to protect a VIP who presumably was the abductor or worse or in some unrelated operation an accident or something occurred after the McCanns inadvertantly got in the way or similar.
    The question is though ziggy if you are correct, ( and I'm not saying you are not as I have had similar thoughts from time to time), are the parents completely innocent? Or do they at least have some knowledge of what happened?

    1. 11 August 2018 at 09:29

      My tongue in cheek bjorn / Ros comment was a bit f craic really.Sometimes you come across something that expresses someone so clearly that you feel as though you know them and what makes them tick.Often the responses is to pity them or laugh.While there's a hint of both when i come across certain streams of unconsciousness and unadulterated nonsense, i felt, this time, i should make light of it...

      VIP is a broad brolly in these times.In it's strictest definition it tends to concern the landed gentry, royals and politicians.In this discussion that stands.As such, VIPs don't need to sully their hands with such dirty work when they can find minions or the desperate to do it for them ( See Boothby and the Kray sisters).Their money-or influence- can pay well.

      The other scenario has been the childless couple looking for a family.Probability and a touch of Geopsychology eliminates that as a realistic one for me.If you were looking to snatch a child you wouldn't go to a holiday complex which is a hive of activity with a possibility of being seen by anyone coming out of an apartment or bar, or on CCTV.It would be too coincidental that you found a complex that happened to have 3 or 4 couples leaving heir children alone each evening and that one of their apartments just happened to be a few steps down to the street.But, if this activity was spotted by a procurer who had received an order for a certain type of child it would take seconds to photograph her and email it.There were more than enough good vantage points to observe from.Then, as darkness began to close in, but while the couples were still checking in on the kids, it would have been easy to cross a street as soon as one left 5A, take the child, walk down half a dozen steps to a waiting car and go.

      The accident scenario doesn't wash either.I understand that some of the ghouls want that one though.It's a way of pronouncing the child dead and nailing the parents but without having it on their conscience that they called the couple murderers.The 'blood splashes' they have all been guilty of posting online didn't exist.No parent has the need to hide the body of their child if she's died in a horrible freak accident.They haven't committed a crime.They'd be guilty of negligence but it would take a long stretch and gullible jury to convict of manslaughter.

      I think, as boring as it seems, the child was abducted.VIP / Politician or not.The endmost apartment presented the least problems in terms of surveillance, speed, and escape.

    2. The most likely scenario in your opinion 15:15, is an abductor walking down half a dozen steps, with the child, and into a waiting car.

      Couple of problems there. The father was across the road from those very steps talking to Jez Wilkins and Jane Tanner had just walked by and was watching the abductor walking across the top of that road, carrying an unconscious child. Oops, back to the drawing board eh.

    3. No.The child hadn't been taken at that point and there were children being picked up from a night creche or just being carried by a parent because it was past their bed time.

  28. @ ziggy
    Are the parents completely in the dark as to what happened then? Abducted by person or persons unknown and they are no wiser than the rest of us? OG too probably.
    I'm not trying to pin you down and thanks for replying, I just want to establish if there was (is) a cover up of some kind,the McCanns have no knowledge of it. They are completely innocent? Or if they do have some idea what happened, what percentage of the whole picture would you estimate they have?

    1. @Anon 11 August 2018 at 21:45
      Why would Ziggy know more than anyone else about what the McCanns know or don't know, or if they're innocent or guilty.Do you think he works for the OG? If I were to answer your questions, I would say that the McCanns can either be completely innocent or completely guilty, if we ignore the child neglect part of the case, but there cannot be anything in between. Suppose the McCanns are innocent why would they then be quiet if they had "some idea" of what happened?

    2. @ Bjorn
      They could be under official orders to.
      Our official secrets act can be very all encompassing.
      You probably have the same from your part of the world. Sweden/Norway/Denmark etc,(even Luton lol.)
      Although I expect the penalties for breaking ours are more severe than yours. We take our secrets very seriously, sometimes locking them away for a hundred years and some files are rumoured to be never to be opened. I wonder what is in them.

    3. Anon 8.50
      'I Wonder what is in them'

      Proof of alien, or rather'non human',existence on Earth.

      A senior royal caught over a barrel with the butler and chief horseman

      The password for Ziggy's VPN

      Conclusive proof Ros wears a wig.
      Nothing to do with cancer,she just likes different instant styles... A kind of actual VPN.

    4. Hi Anon15 August 2018 at 08:50 and thanks for comment
      "They could be under official orders too"
      Yes, I'm sometimes inclined to believe that myself, but I still hope that you're wrong.

    5. Wigs?

      One moment Mrs jekyll and the next moment Mrs Hyde:)

    6. Bjorn

      'Do you think Ziggy works for OG?

      No,he works for the McCann's;)

  29. Why is it 'boring' that you claim Madeleine was abducted? (By persons unknown you mean I presume?) There is not one shred of evidence for this, as you are aware.

    This was posted up-thread:

    There isn't nor ever will be any evidence to convict anyone.Not now.That ship sailed weeks after the event.They were guilty of neglect and careless and they paid the worst possible price.That doesn't make them murderers,paedophiles,money launderers,mafia or witches.Keep it real.If they were any of the above why would the politicians go to so much trouble to protect them ?The protection has existed- but why ?

    I suggest that they above goes to the heart of the matter. The protection has indeed existed but why?

    We probably have to go back to Blair and his dirty war on Iraq to start to understand that.


    1. In my honest opinion, I think there was a major 'Oops' moment in Downing Street, when the missing Madeleine story was called on. It was early hours of the morning, and everyone who responded was acting on pure emotion - a little English girl had been abducted (why not kidnapped?), it was a case of act first, think later.

      I am sure within days, the PM etc, were made aware of the suspicions surrounding the parents, but it would have been hugely unpopular if they suddenly withdrew their support. Instead, they went with it. Capitalising on the huge public response to this case, it brought home the dangers of the internet (yeh, I know), and the dangers of random strangers stealing toddlers from their beds as if it were a clear and present danger with all children at risk.

      Blair, it would seem decided to continue with the lie, by providing the McCanns with a Government press spokesman. However, there is not a cut and dry case against Blair. He could say, that with the limited information he had, he chose to give the parents the benefit of the doubt and that would not be unreasonable.

      However, by July of 2007, Blair et al, appear to have stepped back and Clarence Mitchell appears to have gone rogue. That is, he was no longer working for the government, he was working for the McCanns. I believe his fees were being paid by one of their benefactors.

      One of the most significant interviews at that time was with Vanity Fair. Gerry, and probably Clarence too, thought they were talking 'off the record', hence we have the ghoulish 'marketing ploy' from Gerry and the admission by Clarence that government ministers wouldn't speak to them! They were off 'low level' consular assistance, but they wanted a lot more and clearly weren't getting it.

      The case against Blair. On the one hand it is admirable that Downing Street responded so quickly, and so unreservedly, to the plight of Gerry and Kate McCann.....

      This has become a blog :)

  30. @Anonymous 11 August 2018 at 15:15
    "The accident scenario doesn't wash either.I understand that some of the ghouls want that one though.It's a way of pronouncing the child dead and nailing the parents but without having it on their conscience that they called the couple murderers.The 'blood splashes' they have all been guilty of posting online didn't exist.No parent has the need to hide the body of their child if she's died in a horrible freak accident.They haven't committed a crime.They'd be guilty of negligence but it would take a long stretch and gullible jury to convict of manslaughter. I think, as boring as it seems, the child was abducted.VIP / Politician or not.The endmost apartment presented the least problems in terms of surveillance, speed, and escape."

    Nicely put. I agree. It's the most likely, obvious and simplest explanation and fits with what is known.

    1. Hello Anon 11 August 2018 at 23:41 & and Anon 11 August 2018 at 15:15

      The accident scenario, if it would be considered credible assumes that the parents are directly involved, that Kate or Gerry accidentally may have given Madeleine an excessive dose of sleeping pills or slapped her too hard in a stressful situation to make her keep quiet, nothing of which I find unthinkable.
      As for your;
      ”Nicely put. I agree. It's the most likely, obvious and simplest explanation and fits with what is known” to Anon 15:15

      What in the published Portuguese investigation is it that fits so well into the McCanns’version of an abduction? In that farce, how on earth do you manage to squeeze in the scent of death in the McCanns’ apartment, all the inconsistent witness statements by the McCanns, the Smiths sighting, Kate’s refusal to answer any questions as a suspect or their refusal to go back to PDL in order to shed light on all the ambiguities in the case. I cannot find anything in the PJ-files implying that there had been an abduction.

      In the name of honesty, it must be said that there is nothing to be found in the documented Portuguese investigation indicating that Madeleine has become the victim of a monstrous predator. Nor are there any documented forensic findings in the PJ-files, suggesting someone had broken into the McCanns’ apartment.

      As I’ve said so many times before, the open window, through which the McCanns at first claimed that the intruder had entered, hadn’t been seen by anyone, but Kate. In short, it could only have been a very badly staged abduction, unless Madeleine had walked off by herself, which Kate assured everybody could not have happened.

      Even the two policemen, whom Kate later labelled “ tweedle dee”and “tweedle dum”, who first arrived at the scene of the crime, immediately ruled out the abduction hypothesis. They are definitely my heroes, and I cannot understand why the OG do not hire them.

  31. "Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton10 August 2017 at 18:42

    I asked you to show a little courtesy and respect Ziggy, you have shown neither. You do know that I can pull the plug on you at any time, and you are getting dangerously close."

    "Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton16 August 2017 at 22:28
    I have felt a great sense of relief this past day or so, the spam has gone in the spam, and I feel newly inspired. It is so easy to forget how others can and will do all in their power to drag 'you' down. Negativity creeps up, without your even being aware and I don't think there was anyone quite so negative as Ziggy."

    "Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton14 August 2017 at 11:36
    At the moment Ziggy is on very thin ice. I'm no longer going to publish his two parters and if he spams me, he will go in my spam box."

    "Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton16 August 2017 at 22:39

    Bless you SixYearsInaComaMan, I called on 'The Force' and spammed him. He was sucking all the joy and pride I take in running by blog by using the kind of vernacular more suited to the spiteful Myths forums and the cesspit."

    "Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton16 August 2017 at 20:06
    Ziggy has a spiteful tone to his posts that is more suited to the forums, I don't want it here."


    There is a whole blog about ziggy and his banishment here and he was no more!

    1. Thank you for posting those snippets 00:02. I'm presently congratulating myself for being so patient and polite! lol.

      Looking back and I am beginning to wonder exactly what it was Ziggy was trying to promote. Unfortunately most of his posts were littered with the usual 'hater' accusations and very little substance. Perhaps if he is looking in, we can pin him down to a brief '10 reasons why I believe the parents' - or even 5, his choice. I've always wanted to know what drives the active McCann supporters to have such faith. Seriously, what is it that convinces them? And maybe, why doesn't it work with the rest of us?

    2. @ Ros
      As I pointed out earlier ziggy is a crowd-puller.So even if you dont like him and/or his views ( I do although I dont agree with all of what he says) you have to balance that out against having a blog with hardly any activity and low comment count,which has been the case recently until he started posting again and drawing in others.
      I know what I would rather have, even if I couldn't stand the fellow.
      Your blog was pretty boring the last few months until he returned and if anyone wants to blame somebody for it, then blame me. I was always name checking him (and a few others) in the hope ziggy (and the others) were looking in and would come back and get the blog buzzing again.
      It worked :)

    3. @ Ros 12 August 2018 at 09:44

      So Ros after reading your own comments from a year ago do you now agree that your comment:

      "Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton11 August 2018 at 09:44
      Whilst tis true I grew bored with Ziggy's endless diatribes, I don't have facilities to ban anyone - or if I have, I don't know how to use them"

      Was not factually correct?

      You effectively banned Ziggy by placing his posts in spam/trash and you did not publish them.

    4. Are you asking as Counsel for the prosecution 09:44, lol. Who, apart from yourself, cares. Perhaps I have an app that will spare me the tiresome task of reading and spamming, who knows, and again, who cares.

      It's not a big issue. Ziggy is free to post here whenever he wants, and he does.

    5. LOL at your quest to give Ziggy credit for my blog's popularity, or lack thereof.

      You really are a dim witted fellow. The only person with control over my blog, is me. The more I put in, the more response I get. It's a two way street. If I neglect my blog, which I did, the hits will go down, when I am writing frenetically, the hits go up.

      It's all part of the whole 'accepting personal responsibility' thing, that you McCann lot simply don't get. If I want my blog buzzing, I simply up the ante. I'm an experienced writer, I know how to stimulate ideas and debate.

      Comparing myself to the late great Jeffery Bernard, 'Cristobell was unwell', I lost my ability to write, or at least I thought I had, because it is my greatest fear. As a manic depressive, I tend to catastrophize, well everything. I live in terror of losing words, that is, they will somehow slip from my memory and I will be rendered speechless.

      Probably more than you asked for there, lol, my deepest, darkest fears, but there you go, the knowledge may add a little merriment to the Myths camp when they get bored wishing me cancer.

    6. @ Ros

      So dim witted I actually think the McCann's know more than they are letting on,whatever it was that occurred.

    7. The evidence from your own comments show that you lied about banning ziggy.

      You can deny it till the cows come home but you lied.

    8. @15:24
      dry your eyes, grow up.

    9. Ziggy this ziggy that.Lets try to imitate grown ups.What ziggy says is the crowd puller.He doesn't claim to know the truth, unlike so many.He presents his ideas and highlights weaknesses in others that hold no water.He explodes a few myths.In return all he gets is personal insults or childish digs.Why not take his ideas apart or reply to questions he asks ?That would be grown up. The final post on 'new labour'(july) says much.

    10. 12 August
      Fair enough, but I am still waiting for an answer of his opinion on my question about the parents being completely in the dark or not.
      So it is a two way street.

    11. Anon 13 August 8 46
      Who are you to demand answers from the Zigmeister?You are beneath him.Deal with it.

  32. Hi Rosalinda,
    This is a bit off topic and ten years after the fact, but it's worth analyzing the first few minutes of the amazing TV interview of Gerry McCann by Jeremy Paxman.

    After the preamble, Paxman, like a head teacher reprimanding a recalcitrant sixth former, asks Mr McCann if he was 'naive'.
    The question hits McCann like an electric shock. He tries to compose himself and drags out a reply.

    In a way - there are two answers a person can give to this question.
    Yes, or No.
    If Mr McCann says Yes he is doomed in the public eye for child negligence. If he says No, he will be forced to give his interrogator a plausible explanation.

    So, he tries. Instead of a normal response McCann subtly rephrases what he pretends is Paxman's question and takes it to a different level.

    "Of course we were naive in the 'search'. We have never been exposed to the media previously but are better prepared".

    So in his mind his naivete was all about the 'search'. The abandonment of his three children in the holiday apartment did not enter his mind.
    The publicity and search for their missing daughter by others (certainly not the parents) was what their naivete was all about. The ensuing publicity must be a vendetta.

    It's kind of funny, - because these folk were in the disinformation business themselves from the beginning, generating a PR program without equal.

    The outcome after all these years: - Nobody is allowed to say anything about what really happened - certainly not in England.

    1. Gerry's interview with Paxman is up there in the McCanns top ten cringeiest moments, if not top five. Gerry thought he had the intellect to banter with Paxman, that was his first mistake. He crumbled from the first question.

      Gerry I believe is talking about the press when he admits they were naïve. Gerry uses the entire interview to complain about the treatment he and his wife received from the media.

      Gerry refers to returning to the apartment on 4th May to find the world's press on their doorstep. This is a bizarre moment, because both Gerry and Jeremy, KNOW that it was the parents and their friends who tipped them off. Awkward. While Gerry is bashing the media, Paxman is pointing out that it was the McCanns themselves who started the circus.

      It is not until the end that Madeleine gets a mention. Her Fund is still running and the search is ongoing Gerry said, and no, they were not in a position to make any announcements, but would appeal to the public again if they needed further information.

    2. In 2009, the McCanns still had 'loadsa money' and were suing, or threatening to sue, anyone who crossed them. They were trying to make the press the enemy to smooth a path towards new legislation to protect their privacy. Jeremy Paxman was pointing out the hypocrisy of their using the press when it suited them then wanting to silence them when it didn't. A point that was of course picked up by the Portuguese Supreme Court.

      The McCanns relationship with the media is worthy of an entire blog JC. They thought they could keep the media under their control, forever. An easy mistake to make when you are the hottest story in town, not so much when you are yesterday's news.

      I think the Leverson Inquiry left a bad taste all around JC. Having heard, in graphic detail, all the horror stories, you are left with a 'then what?'. Anyone with even a smidgeon of education understands that attempts to gag or censor the free press in a democratic society will be met with fierce opposition. The media are the fourth, or is it the 5th, Estate, they topple the corrupt, they watch the watchers.

      Earlier posters have suggested politicians have limitless power. They don't. And one of the reasons they don't is because they are under constant surveillance by newshounds looking for a story.

    3. ''In 2009, the McCanns still had 'loadsa money' and were suing, or threatening to sue, anyone who crossed them''

      Yes, because they'remembers of the mafia.I forgot that.The true story is that they were exercising their right to sue anyone who spread malicious lies and slander or defamed them.Your interpretation reflects your warped views and exetremely narrow uninformed opinions.You make as much sense as someone who'd only been made aware of the case days ago.
      You, bjorn, and jc are like a dark unfunny Monty Python sketch.

    4. ''Earlier posters have suggested politicians have limitless power. They don't. And one of the reasons they don't is because they are under constant surveillance by newshounds looking for a story.''

      They do have limitless power and influence.If it wasn't for your desperate need to haunt the McCanns and blacken their name you'd possibly be able to read and learn more.Either way they have far more power than the Police. Do you think detectives wear tee shirts with headlines on thus making it easy for sniffing newshounds ?Or do they shout it from megaphones - ''We've been told to hide stuff''. Wake up.Even if they did they have to get past editors who are answerable to moguls who sip from the same cup as the politicians. And of course there are judges.Think back to the 80s and Lord Havers.Islington.